HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2022-348 - 42 Windom Road - ZBA20/017/W/ES - Windom KW IncStaNRepvrt
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: August 8, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: July 6, 2022
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-348
SUBJECT: 42 Windom Road
Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA20/017NV/ES
Windom KW Inc
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA20/017NV/ES requesting to amend Zoning
By-law 85-1, for Windom KW Inc be approved in the form shown in the Proposed `Proposed
By-law', and `Map No. 1' attached to Report DSD -2022-348 as Attachment `B'; and
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA20/017NV/ES requesting to amend Zoning
By-law 2019-051, for Windom KW Inc be approved in the form shown in the Proposed
`Proposed By-law', and `Map No. V attached to Report DSD -2022-348 as Attachment `B'; and,
That the Proposed By-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended shall have no force
and effect against the subject lands until the date that all appeals relating to By-law2022-040
(Comprehensive Reviewof the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) Stage 2b —Applying NewResidential
Zones on Properties) in relation to the subject lands have been withdrawn or decided and
any applicable appeal periods have expired; and further
That in accordance with Planning Act Section 45 (1.3 & 1.4), applications for minor variances
shall be permitted for lands subject to Zoning By-law Amendment Application
ZBA20/017/W/ES.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation regarding a
Zoning By-law Amendment application for the property located at 42 Windom Road.
• It is Planning staffs recommendation that the Zoning By-law Amendment application be
approved. The proposed application represents an opportunity to provide `missing middle'
housing that addresses a need.
• Community engagement included:
o circulation of a preliminary notice to property owners within 120 metres of the subject
site;
o installation of a large billboard notice sign on the property,-
This
roperty;
This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 281 of 336
o follow up one-on-one correspondence with members of the public who responded to
the circulation or saw the billboard sign;
o notice advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all property owners
within 120 metres of the subject site, and those who responded to the preliminary
circulation, and
o notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on July 15, 2022.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Planning Staff is recommending approval of the requested Zoning By-law Amendment application
to:
amend Zoning By-law 2019-051 by removing site Specific Regulation Provisions 223 and
232 for the subject lands;
add a new Site Specific Provision (342) to Zoning By-law 2019-051 to regulate Floor Space
Ratio (FSR), the required side yard setback, and the minimum required parking; and
amend Special Regulation 744R in Zoning By-law 85-1 to further regulate Floor Space Ratio
(FSR) and Required Parking.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kitchener has received an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment from Windom KW
Inc for a development concept that proposes a three-storey multiple dwelling building with twenty-
four (24) residential units and twenty-four (24) surface parking spaces.
The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on the City's Urban Structure (Map 2 - City
of Kitchener Official Plan) and designated as `Low Rise Residential' (Map 3 - City of Kitchener Official
Plan).
In 2018, Council approved Zoning By-law Amendment application ZC16/001/W/ATP to change the
zoning from Residential Five Zone (R-5) to Residential Six Zone (R-6) to legalize an existing 5 -unit
multiple dwelling. A Special Regulation Provision (744R) was added to the lands to prohibit certain
uses (hospice, lodging house, etc.) and to cap the unit total at 5 units to recognize the existing
dwellings.
J This image cannot currently be displayed.
Figure 1 — Existing Dwelling on Site (5 units)
Page 282 of 336
Between 2019 and now, a new Zoning By-law (2019-051) has been approved by Council. Special
Regulation Provision 744R in Zoning By-law 85-1 was carried forward into the new Zoning By-law
as Site Specific Provisions 223 and 232. The new Zoning being applied to these lands was approved
by Council on March 21 st, 2022 and is currently under appeal.
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment would amend special use provision 744R in Zoning By-
law 85-1 and create a new site specific provision (342) in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The amended
special use provision and new site specific provision would establish special regulations for Floor
Space Ratio (FSR), side yard setback, and required parking. The proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment would also remove the site specific provisions 223 and 232 from the lands in Zoning
By-law 2019-051.
Site Context
The subject property is addressed as 42 Windom Road and is on the west side of Windom Road.
The lot area of the subject site is approximately 0.18 hectares and the lot frontage is 25.9 metres.
The lands contain one five -unit multiple dwelling building. The surrounding neighbourhood contains
a mix of low-rise multiple dwellings, semi-detached, and single detached dwellings. The subject
property is located near the terminus of Windom Road which abuts Howard Robertson Public School,
an elementary school.
� O
q- O�
SUBJECT
AREA
0
COO 0CO
/1/Q U�
o°D
F �
Figure 2 - Location Map: 42 Windom Road
Page 283 of 336
REPORT:
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building and develop the subject property with a
3 -storey, 24 -unit multiple dwelling building. The building is proposed to be cantilevered, with
vehicular access under the building leading to the parking area at the rear of the site. Twenty-four
(24) surface parking spaces, including two visitor parking spaces and one barrier free parking space
are proposed. Twenty-one (2 1) bicycle parking spaces, including fifteen (15) enclosed and secured
spaces for residents, and six (6) short-term spaces on an outdoor bicycle rack, are proposed.
n
R�
FIRE RO.f1E
x.63 .eV tfr SF4LE5 9 �.tim—w.�0 1+4 50 J.
r.�
6M 144rm 1.�CONCRETE SIOEWALK W. Ver
ax axe a3v e'u aw e.x
A-11sa
71.35
Figure 3- Original Development Concept
Figure 4- Revised Development Concept
Through the review and evaluation of this application, a revised development concept has been
prepared. The original concept proposed a long narrow building that did not orient units towards the
street, located surface parking close to the street, oriented massing along the side property line, and
did not contain sufficient amenity space. The revised concept introduces the building cantilever
design feature that orients the massing towards the street, moves the parking to the rear of the site
to be screened by the building, and allows for provision of an adequate on-site amenity area.
To facilitate the redevelopment of the lands, a Zoning By-law Amendment is proposed. The Zoning
By-law Amendment would remove the cap of 5 units, and establish a new site specific provision to
Page 284 of 336
create development standards for Floor Space Ratio (FSR), side yard setback, and required and
visitor parking.
Planning Analysis:
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest
related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3 (d) of the PPS promotes densities for
new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities. The
PPS sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS
promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate
mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting
the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the integration of land use
planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure
planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and
standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will contribute to an appropriate mix of
housing types within the context of the surrounding neighbourhood. The subject lands are within an
existing neighbourhood with adequate servicing capacity, road network capacity, and other required
infrastructure and therefore represents a cost-effective development pattern that minimized land
consumption and servicing costs.
Based on the above, staff is of the opinion that this proposal is in conformity with the PPS.
A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan):
The Growth Plan supports the development of completeand compact communities that are designed
to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range
and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit
viability and active transportation.
Policy 2.2.6.1(a) Municipalities will support housing choice through the achievement of the minimum
intensification and targets in this plan by identifying a diverse range and mix of housing options and
densities, including additional residential units and affordable housing to meet projected needs of
current and future residents.
Policy 2.2.1.4(a) This plan will support the achievement of Complete Communities that feature a
diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and convenient access to local
stores, services and public service facilities.
The proposed development represents multiple dwelling residential, which will contribute to a greater
mix of housing types in the neighbourhood. The existing neighbourhood is well served by local
stores, services, and public service facilities such as a commercial plaza on the corner of Fairway
Road North and River Road East, and the City's Centreville Chicopee Community Centre, just 250
metres away. Planning staff is of the opinion that the development proposal conforms to the Growth
Plan.
Regional Official Plan (ROP), 2010:
Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the
Urban Area. The subject lands are designated Built -Up Area in the ROP. The proposed development
conforms to Policy 2.D.1 of the ROP as this neighbourhood provides for the physical infrastructure
and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential development, including
transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply and wastewater systems, and a broad
Page 285 of 336
range of social and public health services. Regional policies require the City to plan for a range of
housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social,
economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. Regional staff have indicated
that they have no objections to the proposed applications (Attachment `C'). Planning staff are of the
opinion that the applications conform to the Regional Official Plan.
City of Kitchener Official Plan:
Urban Structure
The subject lands are identified as a `Community Areas' in the City's Urban Structure (Map 2). The
planned function of Community Areas is to provide residential uses as well as non-residential
supporting uses intended to serve the immediate residential areas. Community Areas may have
limited intensification with development being sensitive and compatible with the character, form, and
planned function of the surrounding context.
Land Use Designation
The subject lands are designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan (Map 3). Low Rise
Residential areas are intended to accommodate a full range of low density housing types including
single detached, semi-detached, townhouse, and low-rise multiple dwellings. The Low Rise
Residential designation states that the City will encourage and support the mixing and integrating of
innovative and different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-rise built form. No buildings
shall exceed 3 storeys or 11 metres in height.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested zoning by-law amendment represents a housing
form that conforms with the Low Rise Residential land use designation in the City's Official Plan.
Transportation
The City's Official Plan contains policies to develop, support, and maintain a complete, convenient,
accessible and integrated transportation system that incorporates active transportation, public
transit, and accommodates vehicular traffic.
In regard to alternate modes of transportation, objectives of the Official Plan include promoting land
use planning and development that is integrated and conducive to the efficient and effective
operation of public transit, and encourages increased ridership of the public transit system. The City
shall promote and encourage walking and cycling as safe and convenient modes of transportation.
The proposed development aims to increase density on an existing site that is served well by public
transit, with access to Grand River Transit Routes 1, 8 and iXpress Route 206. The proposed
development concept includes provision of safe, secure indoor bicycle storage to encourage active
transportation. Staff is of the opinion that the requested zoning by-law amendment conforms with
the transportation policies of the City's Official Plan.
Urban Design
The City is committed to achieving a high standard of urban design, architecture and place -making
to positively contribute to quality of life, environmental viability and economic vitality. Urban design
is a vital component of city planning and goes beyond the visual and aesthetic characterof individual
buildings and also considers the functionality and compatibility of development as a means of
strengthening complete communities.
Urban Design policies in the 2014 Official Plan support creating visually distinctive and identifiable
places, structures and spaces that contribute to a strong sense of place and community pride, a
distinct character and community focal points that promote and recognize excellence and innovation
in architecture, urban design, sustainable building design and landscape design. The City will
require high quality urban design in the review of all development applications through the
implementation of the policies of the Official Plan and the City's Urban Design Manual.
Page 286 of 336
The revised development concept with a cantilevered vehicle entrance represents an innovative and
efficient housing form that assists in meeting and achieving several urban design objectives. Firstly,
the massing and orientation of the building is facing toward the street and the public realm.
Opportunities for windows, doors and balconies facing the public realm will help to activate the
streetscape and provide visual interest. Secondly, the cantilever allows the building to screen the
surface parking at the rear of the site. Urban Design policies favour the screening of vehicle storage
to ensure the streetscape is not dominated by vehicles, which can be achieved using this building
design. Finally, the building design provides space at the rear of the site for an on-site at grade
amenity space to be used by future residents. Provision of amenity space is a critical urban design
feature for multiple residential developments.
Housing
The City's primary objective with respect to housing in the Official Plan is to provide for an
appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure and affordability to
satisfy the varying housing needs of our community through all stages of life. This low rise multiple
dwelling proposal can be considered a "missing middle" housing type by providing an option that
bridges the gap between high density residential towers and single detached dwellings. The
proposed housing type is an important segment in Kitchener's housing continuum.
Policy 4.C.1.9. Residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing neighbourhoods will
be designed to respect existing character. A high degree of sensitivity to surrounding context is
important in considering compatibility.
Policy 4.C.1.12. The City favours a land use pattern which mixes and disperses a full range of
housing types and styles both across the city as a whole and within neighbourhoods.
Policy 4.C.1.22: The City will encourage the provision of a range of innovative housing types and
tenures such as rental housing, freehold ownership and condominium ownership including common
element condominium, phased condominium and vacant land condominium, as a means of
increasing housing choice and diversity.
Based on the above housing policies, staff is of the opinion that the application conforms to the
Official Plan.
Policy Conclusion
Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law amendment is consistent with
policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan and the City of Kitchener Official Plan, and represents good
planning.
Proposed Zoning By-IawAmendment:
The subject lands are currently zoned both in Zoning By-law 85-1 and Zoning By-law 2019-051
(currently under appeal). Changes to both By-laws are necessary as part of this Zoning By-law
Amendment and are described separately below.
Zoning By-law 85-1:
The subject lands are currently zoned `Residential Six Zone (R-6)' with Special Regulation Provision
744R and Special Use Provision 470U in Zoning By-law 85-1.
The applicant has requested to amend Special Regulation Provision 744R in Zoning By-law 85-1
Page 287 of 336
The amendment would remove the cap of a maximum of 5 dwelling units and replace it with site
specific development standards for the proposed multiple residential development.
Current wording of Special Regulation Provision 744R.
Notwithstanding Section 40.2.6 of this By-law, the maximum number of dwelling units in a multiple
dwelling shall be five.
Proposed new revised wording of Special Regulation Provision 744R
Notwithstanding Section 40.2.6 of this By-law, the following regulations shall apply.
a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 0.7
b) The minimum required parking shall be 1 space per unit
c) The minimum required visitor parking shall be 8% of required parking
V. I I : :iMIFFIVI iSF%ai167i
The subject lands are zoned `Low Rise Residential Five Zone (RES -5)' with Site -Specific Provisions
223 and 232 in Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal).
The applicant has requested to remove Site Specific Provisions 223 and 232, which cap the total
dwelling units at 5 and not permit certain other uses in the RES -5 zone. The current wording is
provided below:
(223) — Within the lands zoned RES -5 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid
Schedule 239 of Appendix A, the maximum number of dwelling units in a multiple dwelling shall
be five and the following uses shall not be permitted:
a) hospice,-
b)
ospice,b) lodging house,-
c)
ouse,c) an additional dwelling unit (attached) associated with a semi-detached dwelling; and,
d) street townhouse dwelling.
(232) — Within the lands zoned RES -5 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid
Schedule 239 of Appendix A, the maximum number of dwelling units in a multiple dwelling shall
be five and the following uses shall not be permitted:
a) hospice;
b) lodging house,-
c)
ouse,c) additional dwelling unit (attached) in association with a semi-detached dwelling; and,
d) street townhouse dwelling.
The applicant is proposing to add Site Specific Provision (342) as follows
(342) — Notwithstanding Tables 5-5 and 7-6 of this By-law within the lands zoned RES -5 and shown
as affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 239 of Appendix A, the following
special regulations shall apply.-
a)
pply.a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 0.7
b) The minimum required parking shall be 1 space per unit
c) The minimum required visitor parking shall be 8% of required parking
d) The minimum side yard setback shall be 2.5 metres
Staff offer the following comments with respect to the requested amendments and special
regulations.
Removal of unit cap of 5 units
The cap of 5 dwelling units was established in 2018 to legalize an existing 5 -unit multiple dwelling.
The applicant has now proposed to demolish that building and replace it with a 24 -unit multiple
Page 288 of 336
dwelling. Staff are supportive of the proposed redevelopment of the site with a low-rise multiple
dwelling building and do not have concerns with the removal of the restriction of 5 dwelling units in
a multiple dwelling.
Floor Space Ratio
The maximum floor space ratio in both zoning by-laws is 0.6. Policy 15.D.3.11 of the Official Plan
allows for increases up to 0.75 as follows:
"15.D.3.11. A maximum Floor Space Ratio of 0.6 will apply to all development and
redevelopment. Site-specific increases to allow up to a maximum Floor Space Ratio
of 0.75 may be considered where it can be demonstrated that the increase in the
Floor Space Ratio is compatible and meets the general intent of the policies in this
Plan. An Official Plan Amendment MI be required to consider an increase in the Floor
Space Ratio greater than 0.75. "
Increases in Floor space ratio between 0.6 and 0.75 require demonstration of compatibility and
meeting the general intent of the policies of the Official Plan. Compatibility is defined in the Official
Plan as:
"Land uses and building forms that are mutually tolerant and capable of existing together in harmony
within an area without causing unacceptable adverse effects, adverse environmental impacts or
adverse impacts. Compatibility or compatible should not be narrowly interpreted to mean "the same
as" or even as "being similar to."
The existing surrounding neighbourhood on Windom Road is made up of a mix of low-rise housing
types, including multiple dwellings. Adjacent to the subject lands at 48 Windom Road is a 12 unit
townhome multiple dwelling development. The road also contains single and semi-detached
dwellings. The wider surrounding neigbourhood contains larger multiple dwelling buildings. The
property abutting the rear of the subject lands is a 4 -storey, 30 -unit multiple dwelling building.
The proposed building at 3 storeys and 24 -units is similar to, and compatible with, the surrounding
neighbourhood in the opinion of Planning Staff.
Required Parking &Visitor Parking
The applicant is requesting a parking rate of 1 space per unit, including 8% visitor parking. This
would result in a total of twenty-four (24) parking spaces; twenty-two (22) spaces for residents and
two (2) visitor spaces. In addition to vehicle parking spaces, the applicant is proposing fifteen (15)
indoor secured bicycle parking spaces, and six (6) outdoor short-term bicycle parking spaces. The
location of the site is well served by existing public transit. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed
complement of vehicle and bicycle storage on site is adequate and a full range of transportation
options are available to future residents.
Side Yard Setback
The applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 2.5 metres, a slight reduction from the minimum 3
metres required in Zoning By-law 2019-051.The cantilevered building design provides unit
orientation towards the front and rear of the site, which helps to mitigate impacts to side yards. Given
this proposed design, Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed 2.5 metre side yard setback
is appropriate for this site.
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the Zoning By-law Amendment was undertaken on January 21, 2021 to
applicable City departments and other review authorities. No major concerns were identified by any
commenting City department or agency. Copies of the comments are found in Attachment "C" of this
report.
Page 289 of 336
The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment:
• Planning Justification and Urban Design Report
Prepared by IBI Group, November 16, 2020
Revised: November 17, 2021
• Functional Site Grading, Servicing and Stormwater Management Report
Prepared by IBI Group, November 17, 2021
• Site Concept Plan
Prepared by IBI Group, December 12, 2020.
Revised: April 7, 2022
• Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan and Arborist Report
Prepared by IBI Group, November 16, 2020
• Geotechnical Report
Prepared by Chung & Vander Doelen, October 30, 2020
Community Input and Staff Response:
Staff received written responses from 10 residents with respectto the proposed development. These
can be found in Attachment `D'. A summary of what we heard, and staff responses are noted below.
What We Heard
StaffComment
The applicant is providing 24 parking spaces for 24 units.
This will result in too many people
2 visitor parking spaces are included. Street parking is for
parking on the street on Windom
temporary use only and cannot exceed use for 3 hours.
Road
Residents will be aware of the parking availability before
choosing to rent a unit. The on -street parking rules are
enforceable by the City's By-law Enforcement staff.
The proposed development will remain a low-rise
residential use, which is permitted in the Low Rise
This development is too large for
Residential land use designation in the Official Plan. The
this site
scale and massing is compatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood and the use is present on Windom Road,
including adjacent to the subject property.
The number of units for the proposed development is low
The proposed development will
and does not warrant a detailed traffic study. Staff have
result in an increase in traffic.
directed residents to Regional transportation staff to
Current conditions for turning onto
discuss the existing condition at nearby Thaler Ave and
Fairwary Road from Thaler Avenue
Fairway Road North (Regional Road). City and Regional
are poor.
transportation staff have no objections to the proposed
development and Zoning By-law Amendment.
Garbage storage has been detailed on the revised site plan
Garbage storage will become a
to include roll out bins that are collected from the front of
nuisance for adjacent neighbours
the site by private collection and transported and returned
by building management. Garage storage and collection
will be reviewed and approved through the site planning
Page 290 of 336
process and secured through a registered development
agreement to ensure the long-term functionality.
Planning Conclusions:
In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the Zoning By-law amendment. Staff is of the
opinion that the subject applications are consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement
(2020), conform to Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan, and
the City of Kitchener Official Plan and represent good planning. Staff recommends that the
application be approved.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the City's strategic vision through
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this recommendation.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
Council / Committee meeting. A large billboard notice sign was posted on the property and
information regarding the application was posted to the City's website. Following the initial circulation
referenced below, an additional courtesy notice of the public meeting was circulated to all property
owners within 120 metres of the subject lands, those responding to the preliminary circulation and
Notice of the Public Meeting was posted in the Waterloo Region Record on July 15, 2022 (a copy of
the Notice may be found in Attachment `B').
CONSULT — The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment was originally circulated to property owners
within 120 metres of the subject lands on January 21, 2021. In response to this circulation, staff
received written responses from 10 residents, which are included in Attachment `D'.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Zoning By-law 85-1
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Official Plan, 2014
• Regional Official Plan, 2010
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
• Planning Act, 1990
• A Place to Grow Growth Plan, 2020
REVIEWED BY: Stevenson, Garett — Manager of Development Review, Planning Division
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman - General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Attachment B — Newspaper Notice
Attachment C — Department and Agency Comments
Attachment D — Neighbourhood Comments
Attachment E — Concept Plan
Page 291 of 336
City of Kitchener
COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 42 Windom Rd
n,+e of ranee+o.,.,. Written Comments Due February 24, 2021
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment
Comments of: Environmental Planning — City of Kitchener
Commenter's Name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.mussel man@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7068
Date of Comments: February 19, 2021
i=..1 I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
LSI I do NOT plan to attend the meeting
1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application:
4P Primary Sustainability Statement, 42 Windom Road. October 27, 2020. IBI Group.
2. Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the supporting documentation (as listed above) to support a site plan application
proposing the construction of an 8 -storey, mixed use building with ground floor commercial plus parking
at 525 New Dundee Rd. and provide the following:
1. Although the Ontario Building Code (OBC) is progressive, going forward all developments will need to
include more energy reduction measures as the City (and Region of Waterloo) strive to achieve our
greenhouse gas reduction target. This new development should identify target(s) and measures above
Ontario Building Code (OBC) that would further energy conservation, generation, operation and could
be of benefit for future residents / tenants.
2. We would advise the applicant to explore and confirm in a revised sustainability statement which
options would be best suited to the site and development. Potential items to consider are:
Following (or incorporating several components) Energy Star, R-2000, Built Green, Passive House,
LEED or Net Zero that would go beyond the OBC to conserve energy and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions
A'water conservation system' such as grey water recycling, rainwater harvesting systems, cisterns
or rain barrels being incorporated into the development
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 292 of 336
Using low or no VOC paints and finishes to improve air quality
• Providing electrical vehicle (EV) parking, charging or have space(s) EV ready.
■ Having solar installed, or having the roof designed and built to be solar ready.
3. As part of the Kitchener Great Places Award program every several years there is a Sustainable
Development category. Also, there are community-based programs to help with and celebrate and
recognize businesses and sustainable development stewards (Regional Sustainability Initiative -
http:,/www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/regional-sustainability-initiative and
TravelWise - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/travelwise).
4. Conditions of Approval in Principal (AIP) and Full Site Plan Approval:
Conditions of Approval in Principal
1. A revised Sustainability Statement is prepared and submitted.
Conditions of Full Site Plan Approval
1. The Sustainability Statement is approved.
5. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.4. Development applications will be required to demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the City, through the completion of a Sustainability Report/Checklist in
accordance with the Complete Application Requirements Policies in Section 17.E.10, that the
proposal meets the sustainable development policies of the Plan and that sustainable
development design standards are achieved.
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.5. The City will encourage and support, where feasible and
appropriate, alternative energy systems, renewable energy systems and district energy in
accordance with Section 7.C.6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy
consumption.
Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.4. In areas of new development, the City will encourage
orientation of streets and/or lot design/building design with optimum southerly exposures. Such
orientation will optimize opportunities for active or passive solar space heating and water heating.
Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.8. Development applications will be required to demonstrate,
to the satisfaction of the City, energy is being conserved or low energy generated. Such studies
may include, but not limited to an Energy Conservation Efficiency Study, a Feasibility Study for
Renewable or Alternative Energy Systems, District Heating Feasibility Study, and the completion
of a Sustainability Report/Checklist in accordance with the Complete Application Requirements
Policies in Section 17.E.10.
Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.27. The City will encourage developments to incorporate the
necessary infrastructure for district energy in the detailed engineering designs where the
potential for implementing district energy exists.
5. Anticipated Fees:
Unknown
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 293 of 336
City of Kitchener
COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 42 Windom Road
Date of ""eet4;g4 Written comments due February 24, 2021
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment
Comments of: Environmental Planning — City of Kitchener
Commenter's Name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.musselman@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 X 7068
Date of Comments: February 18, 2021
® I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion) 1*/
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (concerns/requirements outlined ,elay(i) %,
1. Plans, Studies and Reports submitted as part of a complete Planning Act°Applicaemn:
• Final Planning Justification and Urban Design Report 42 Windom Road, Kitcherner. November 16,
2020. IBI Group.
• Arborist Report 42 Windom Road, Kitchener, November.16, 2020. 1 B I Group,
• Preliminary Tree Preservation / Enhancement Plan {Sheer, Num;ber1-1) 42 Windom Road.
November 16, 2020. IBI Group.
Is Geotechnical Investigation Proposed 24A.,nit.5tacked iownhouses 42 Windom Rd, Kitchener.
October 30, 2020. Chung & Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd.
2. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the supporting documentatrd i (as,isted above) to support of the proposed ZBA proposing
the demolition of the existing building and coristrucLion of a new 22 -unit multiple dwelling building at 42
Windom Road and provide the following
Based on my review of the supporting documentation the development as proposed should not be
supported.
• The arborNt ri�'port assessed 50 trees_ The assessment noted that the proposed development
r�.
concept woulr d requirer the removal of 43 trees, including 10 on adjacent properties and 3 in joint
ownership
c W thr_ w v.'riueri perm ssfon for removal of or impact to trees offsite andlor in joint
ownership we should not support the proposed development concept or zoning
amendment.
• In` addition to the 7 trees to be retained, the proposed development should attempt to
incorporate, protect and conserve many of the other 17 healthy trees (good or excellent
condition) onsite.
The development should be redesigned to incorporate and protect existing healthy trees
onsite and eliminate any need for tree removals offsite.
3. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• As per Section 8.C.2 — Urban Forests of the Official Plan ...
e policy 8.C.2.16., the City requires the preparation and submission of a tree management plan
in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy (available on the City's Website), as a
condition of a development application.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 294 of 336
policy 8.C.2.6., the City will incorporate existing and/or new trees into the streetscape or road
rights-of-way and encourage new development or redevelopment to incorporate, protect and
conserve existing healthy trees and woodlands in accordance with the Urban Design Policies
in Section 13 (Landscape and Natural Features) of the Urban Design Manual (UDM) and the
Development Manual.
Please see UDM Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanagement for detailed
submission requirements
4, Anticipated_ Fees:
* N/A
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully— Building Community
Page 295 of 336
Eric Schneider
From: Eric Riek
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 2:14 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - ZBA (42 Windom Road)
Attachments: 42 Windom -department & agency circulation letter.pdf
Hi Eric,
Based on a preliminary review of the functional servicing report, geotechnical report and water distribution, Engineering
has no concerns with the proposed ZBA. Engineering details will be worked out during detailed site plan design phase.
Any questions, please let me know.
Eric
From: Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 20211:28 PM
To: Eric Riek <Eric.Riek@kitchener.ca>
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - ZBA (42 Windom Road)
Hi,
Can you please review and provide comments when you are back?
Thanks,
Linda
Linda Cooper, L.E.T, C.E.T
Manager I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7974 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 llnda.c000erLftItchener,ca
From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 202112:02 PM
To: Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave
Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; DSD - Planning Division
<DSDPlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA - Planning (planning@grandriver.ca)
<planning@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango
<landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson <Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron
<gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Lesley MacDonald<Lesley.MacDonaId@kitchener.ca>; Linda Cooper
<Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation
<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Parmi Takk
<Parmi.Takk@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data
Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder
<Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; UW - SA <Steven.amirikah@uwaterloo.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>;
Page 296 of 336
WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning
glannin wrdsb.ca>
Cc: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - ZBA (42 Windom Road)
Please see attached. Comments or questions should be directed to Eric Schneider, Planner (copied on this email).
Christine Kompter
Administrative Assistant I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6th Floor I P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
519-741-2200 ext. 7425 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 christine.kompter@kitchener.ca
Page 297 of 336
Hi Eric,
No heritage planning concerns.
Thanks,
Victoria
Victoria Grohn
Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7041 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 victoria.grohnakitchener.ca
Page 298 of 336
Infrastructure Services
ORerations - Design & Development
KjTcM'?4FR
PARKILAND DEDICATION 11 14
City of Kitchener
Kitchener Operations Facility, 131 Goodrich Dr.
Kitchener, ON N2C 2E8
PART 1: SITE INFORMATION AND BACKGROUND
1.1
Application Type
Zone Change Application
1.2
Address of Property
42 Windom Road
1.3
Owner
Windom KW Inc.
1.4
Previous Dedications
No Previous Dedication
PART 2: SITE USE DETAILS
2.1 Land Use Appraisal
Appraisal Value
Dedication Rate
Site Statistics:
2.2 Land Area (ha)
2.3 Land Frontage - Severances only (I.m.)
2-4 Comer Lot (yes/no)
2.15 Net Land Frontage (I.m.)
Residential Units:
2-6 Existing Units to be Retained
2.7 Existing Units to be Demolished
2A Proposed Units:
2-9 Proportion of New Units
Commercial / Industrial Floor Area (m�:
2-10 Existing to be Retained
2.71 Existing to be Demolished
2.12 Proposed
2,13 Net Addition
2.14 Percent Addition
Multiple Residential Townhouse
$1,110,000 per hectare
1 ha : 500 units
1.1 P. _
0
5
22
17
PART 3: FINAL DEDICATION
3.1 Dedication Type Cast in Lieu
3.2 Park Dedication - Cash in Lieu 537.740.00
3.3 Park Dedication - Land Requirement (ha) No Land Roquired
PART 4: COMMENTS
4.1 IDedication requirements are subject to the Parkland Dedication Policy current at the time of application. Should any
further revisions be made to the site plan, a revised parkland dedication may be required.
Date application received January 20, 2021
Date comments due I February 24, 202
Date of completion: I February 23, 2021
Park dedication calculation ghown above is an estimate only. The required dedication will be determined as of the day prior to the issuance of Building Permit.
All calculations are based on City of Kitchener Council Policy 1-1074 and Council Report OTS -10-134.
Page 299 of 336
City of Kitchener
PRE -SUBMISSION CONSULTATION COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 42 Windom Rd.
Date of Meeting: n/a
Application Type: ZBA & OPA x /
Comments Of: Parks & Cemeteries
Commenter's Name: Rebecca Roy
Email: rebecca.roy@kitchener.ca p.>
Phone: 519-741-2600 x4151
g
Date of Comments: February 18, 2021;;
I plan to attend the meeting (questions/conccrr is/comn ier tsYfor discussion)
0 I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (nolt ncerns)'`
1. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
No comments.
2. Plans, Studies and Reporx,s,,to submit,,as part of a complete Planning Act Application:
No comments.
3. Anticipated Req"dfrements'of full Site Plan Approval:
Pr-yrn nt of parkland dedication cash•in-]icu.
Fulfillment of street tree planting at 1 large stature tree per 9 linear meters of Residential property
frontage.
4. Policies, Standards and Resources:
Parkland Dedication Policy
Development Manual
5. Anticipated Fees:
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully— Building Community
Page 300 of 336
1 Parkland dedication will be required for the site plan application taken as cash -in -lieu of land
at the policy standard rate of 1ha per 500 units, at a value of $1,110,000.00 per hectare as
per the Multiple Residential (Townhouse) development land class.
With its proposed residential unit count of 22, the net increase of residential units is 17
when including a credit for 5 existing units to be demolished. The estimated parkland
dedication cash -in -lieu of land amount is calculated at $37,740.00
Calculation: (17 / 500 units) x $1,110,000.00 = $37,740.00
.2 Dedication requirements are subject to the Parkland Dedication Policy current, a. the t-Irne of
application.
.3 Should any further revisions be made to the site plan, a revised parkland dedication may be
required.
.4 In the event of a discrepancy between the parkland dedica'io'n calf la ion form and this
.y
memo, contact the above -noted Parks & Cemetehe .staff far cl cifiCation.
$,t
w
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 301 of 336
City of Kitchener
Zoning By -Law Amendment COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 42 Windom Rd
Date of Meeting: Enter date of meeting.
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment
Comments Of: Planning- Urban Design
Commenter's Name: Pegah Fahimian
Email: Pegah.fahimian@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext:7342
Date of Comments: Feb 26, 2021
L11 I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
I. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
Minimize the visual impact of parking through the thoughtful placement, orientation and
articulation of built form. Site building to face and activate the public realm. The building should
occupy a minimum of 75% of a site's street frontage. Locate surface and structured parking away
from public street frontage, preferably at the rear of the buildings and internal to sites. Due to
limited frontage of the site, the applicant may wish to explore additional consolidation or design
modifications, which would allow the building to re -orient such that more units face the street and
rear yard (rather than internal lot lines, where significant privacy impacts are created). The options
may be to design units as stacked and back to back townhouses facing the street or low-rise
apartment building.
Stacked and Back -to -Back town house Low -Rise Apartment Buildin
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 302 of 336
• The proposed layout shows 4.5m front yard setback. New building should be consistent with the
existing neighborhood setback pattern.
• Consider ways to keep some of the existing trees, such as maximizing the setback from the side and
back of property line thus not interfering with the existing trees and then being able to introduce
further landscaping
• A minimum 1.5m landscaped buffer is required on all property lines. The current layout does not
have 1.5m buffer on south side of the proposed building
• Provide a shared, at -grade outdoor amenity space that is integrated with the site and landscape
design. Provide seating options and be barrier free accessible without requiring users to cross
parking areas or drive aisles.
A 1.8 m high visual barrier should be noted on the plan when parking is adjacent to residentia'
Design unit accesses to be clearly defined, consistent, easy to identify and without adding
unnecessary visual clutter to a building's elevations. The use of multiple material types and
articulated elements such as porches is encouraged to provide visual variety in built form.
Please ensure all publicly visible fagade are well articulated and detailed. Use materials, details,
colour, architectural projections, etc. to create visually consistent and engaging elevations on all
sides.
The proposed utilities should be coordinated and provided on the plan, Metering, transformers will
not be supported at the front of the building. A composite utility plan should be provided as part of
clearing of conditions to coordinate with landscape design and building elevations.
2. Anticipated Requirements of full Site Plan Approval:
Updated Site Plan
Tree Management Plan
,civ..von.kitchener.ca/tree maUggeniInt`
The tree management plan should identify all existing trees to be retained, relocated and
removed and the tree management methods to be employed to protect any existing trees
during construction in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy. This plan should also
identify all trees located on adjacent properties, where the dripline encroaches onto the subject
property, in order to ensure that these trees are not directly impacted by any proposed grading.
■ Written permission for removal of or impact to trees in joint ownership along property lines is
required.
■ The tree management plan should accurately show the driplines of the trees; identify the
species, condition of the tree, the impact of development on the tree and show the existing and
proposed grades.
■ The protection methods must be clearly identified and accurately shown on the plan.
An assessment of the value of the vegetation proposed for removal is required and
compensation plantings to that value should be provided beyond UDM base standards through
the Landscape Plan that will be required as part of final Site Plan approval.
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully— Building Community
Page 303 of 336
A Landscape Plan is required - please see UDM Part C, Section 15
A copy of the Grading Plan must be submitted with the Landscape Plan
A Lighting Plan is required - please see UDM Part C, Section 4
Building Elevations and floor plans are required
* Provide a variety of architectural styles and avoid repetition of identical materials, features and
building massing.
* Full colour building elevation specifying all materials and colours are required
* Consider providing quality building designs and orient architectural details to enhance public
realm.
■ The main entrance into the building should be clearly distinguishable through its
architectural design and treatment and should act as the focal point of the dwelling and be
given appropriate design emphasis.
* Please find enclosed markup plan for additional comments.
3. Policies, Standards and Resources:
Urban design policies are intended to address the visual character, aesthetic and compatibility of land
use including heritage features. The objective of Urban Design Policies is to create safe, attractive,
simulating, accessible, and barrier -free environment in which to live and work.
Within the City's approved Official Plan there are numerous sections that are relevant including Part C,
Section 11 Urban Design. www.kit&bgrier�'iaZ§ffi6alplan
A link to the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual — UDM - is provided. Please be aware that over the
next year this document will be updated to reflect Official Plan policies and new standards of best
practice. www.kitdhenerica&, dm'
Part A of the Manual provides further urban design and built form objectives. Part B of the Manual
contains Design Briefs which outline specific requirements related to particular geographic areas or land
uses. Part C of the Manual contains City standards for many site development requirements and these
should be accurately reflected in the proposal: parking stall dimensions; aisle widths; sidewalk
dimensions; planting rates; landscape plan details; dark -sky luminaire compliance and photometric
details. The following sections of the Urban Design Manual must be considered when doing the detailed
design of the site:
Contents
[i!y-I. LAi Design,
Low -Rise Multi -Residential
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 304 of 336
Region of Waterloo
Eric Schneider
Planner
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Matthew Colley
519-577-6241
File: C14-60/4/20017
February 17, 2021
Planning Division, Community Services Dept.
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Schneider
Re: ZBA20/017/W/ES
42 Windom Road
Windom KW Inc.
CITY OF KITCHENER
The owner/applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building and construct a new
22 -unit multiple dwelling building. The subject lands currently contain a 5 -unit multiple
dwelling building. To facilitate the redevelopment of the lands, the owner/applicant is
requesting to remove a special regulation provision (744R) that limits the number of units
on the site to 5. The proposed application requests a new special regulation provision to
be added to the Zoning By -Law to allow an FSR of 0.75 and a parking reduction.
Regional Fee
Regional Staff acknowledge receipt of the required Zoning By -Law Amendment fee of
$1,150.00.
Hydrogeology and Source Water
Regional Staff note that a Salt Management Plan is required as part of a future Site Plan
application.
Water Services
Regional Staff have reviewed the Final Functional Site Grading, Servicing and SWM
Report 42 Windom Road, City of Kitchener, prepared by IBI Group dated November 16,
Document Number: 3562499 Version: 1
Page 305 of 336
2020. Appendix D of the report included a Hydrant flow test that supports the proposed
development.
However, a modeling request was made by City Staff back in September 2019
proposing to remove a local 150 mm dia watermain located in an easement at 312
Southill Drive that connects with the 450 mm in diameter ductile iron watermain on River
Rd E. Part of the report to City staff included results located within the proposed
development.
Regional Staff note that the current hydrant test for the proposed development at 42
Windom Rd shows that the development can be supported. However, Regional Staff
note that removing the easement of the watermain may address negative impacts on
the available fire flow at the subject site. Discussions with City Staff has indicated that
the City will now not be removing the easement as it could negatively impact the
proposed development. Regional Staff have no further concerns given that the City has
no issues with the proposed development and will maintain the watermain in the
easement.
Regional Staff advise that the subject property is located in Kitchener Zone 4 with a
static hydraulic grade line of 384 mASL. Any development with a finished road elevation
below 327.9 mASL will require individual pressure reducing devices on each water
service in accordance with Section B.2.4.7 of the Design Guidelines and Supplemental
Specifications for Municipal Services for January 2020.
Airport Regulation:
Regional Staff advise there are no concerns. However, the owner/applicant is advised
that the subject lands are located within 6 kilometres of the outer Airport Zoning
Regulated (Transport Canada) area.
Regional Staff have no objection to the proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment
application.
Regional Development Charges
Any future development on the subject lands will be subject to provisions of Regional
Development Charges By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
Matthew Colley, MCIP, RPP
Planner
Document Number: 3562499 Version: 1
Page 306 of 336
City of Kitchener
PRE -SUBMISSION CONSULTATION COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 42 Windom Rd.
Date of Meeting: unknown
Application Type: ZBA/SP
Comments Of: WRDSB
Commenter's Name: Nathan Hercanuck
Email: nathan—hercanuck@wrdsb.ca
Phone: 519-570-0003 x4459
Date of Comments: February 18, 2021
❑ 1 plan to attend the meeting (questions/t.(.iitalrns/, omriierits for discussion)
-1 I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
2. Plans, Studies and Reports;,to sbmtt>,,aspat of a complete Planning Act Application:
3. Anticipated Requirements of fulli6,Plan Approval:
IN %,..
i;, of , o
4. Policies, Standards arid. Resources:
5. Anticipated Fees:
Flease be advised that any development an the subject lards is subject to the provisions of the
Waterloo Region District School Board's Education Development Charges By-law 2016 or any successor
thereof and may require the payment of Education Development Charges for these developments prior
to issuance of a building permit.
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 307 of 336
Good Afternoon Eric,
The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has reviewed the above application and based on our
development circulation criteria have the following comment(s)/condition(s):
A) That any Education Development Charges shall be collected prior to the issuance of a building
permit(s).
If you require any further information, please contact me by e-mail at Jordan. Neale@wcdsb.ca.
Thank you,
Jordan Neale
Planning Technician, WCDSB
480 Dutton Dr, Waterloo, ON N2L 4C6
519-578-3660 ext. 2355
Page 308 of 336
follows:
DSD -2022-348 Attachment "A"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
, 2022
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — Windom KW Inc. —
42 Windom Road)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 for the lands specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as
Schedule Number 239 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing
the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1, in
the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Residential Six Zone (R-6) with Special Use
Provision 470U and Special Regulation Provision 744R to Residential Six Zone (R-6) with
Special Use Provision 470U and Special Regulation Provision 744R.
2. Appendix D of By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by replacing the current wording and revising
the wording of regulation Section 744R as follows:
744. Notwithstanding Sections 6 and 40.2.6 of this By-law, the following regulations shall
apply for a multiple dwelling:
a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 0.7.
b) The minimum required parking shall be 1 space per dwelling unit.
c) The minimum required visitor parking shall be 8% of required parking."
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
, 2022.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 309 of 336
NVTd --
u SOMA NIVNI „
aavxoao
,.aa�.. o�an,.HooE> �m o�ay.wo a�axa�.a xvoa woan�w, zv
kyr a iy�sb �f/ 9N i O i I a
1N3W1NVdV
WINDOM ROAD
� �
0
E
E E
E
E
E E
_
E
E E
E E
--
-
j
o
0
ca
O
N
-
-
Q
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
F
fora development in your neighbourhood
42 Windom RoadR ��NL
Have Your Voice Heard!
Site Plan
Multiple
Residential
Building
3 Storeys,
24 Dwelling
Units
Date: August 8, 2022
Time: 7:00 p.m.
z Location: Council Chambers,
s
Kitchener City Ha II
200 King Street West
arVirtual Zoom Meeting
Floor Space
Ratio (FSR)
of 0.7
To view the staff report, agenda,
find meeting details or to
appear as a delegation, visit:
kitchener.ca/meetings
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal rights, visit:
www.kitchenenca/
Pla n n i ngAppl ications
or contact:
Eric Schneider, Senior Planner
519.741.2200 x7843
eric.schneider@ kitchener.ca
The City of Kitchener has received an application for a Zoning by-law
Amendment to facilitate the development of the lands with 3 -storey multiple
residential building having 24 dwelling units, 24 vehicle parking spaces, 21
bicycle parking spaces and a Floor Space Ratio (F ;J(Y-_811 of 336
From: Debbie Evans <
Sent: Friday, June 3, 2022 10:46 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 42 Windom Road- Zoning By-law Amendment
That is about what we thought it was going to look like and is even uglier and more out of
character with the neighbourhood than the previous design. It does very little to address the
parking concerns. It is "progress" - we don't have to like it.
From: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Sent: May 10, 2022 2:10 PM
To: 'Debbie Evans' < >
Subject: RE: 42 Windom Road- Zoning By-law Amendment
Hello Debbie,
Please see proposed elevation drawings below.
Thank you for your comments and concerns regarding parking. I understand that Windom Road was
recently reconstructed, which could impact street parking. The applicant has proposed to make 2 of the
24 parking spaces Visitor Parking spaces, which could accommodate overnight parking in the winter
months. That means that the parking will be unbundled (renting a unit does not automatically come
with a parking space, prospective tenants would need to rent it separately) which allows for residents
without a car to rent simply a dwelling unit. The small unit sizes will target single person households
which will be more likely to have one or less cars.
Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Page 312 of 336
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
(519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
From: Debbie Evans < >
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2022 9:14 AM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 42 Windom Road -Zoning By-law Amendment
Hi Eric,
Do you have an elevation of what this new design will look like? It would be good to publish
that along with this design diagram to allow people to visualize it. If we are reading the plan
correctly, it appears that this new design of the building will pretty much fill the front of the
property, with a pass-through under part of the building to the parking lot at the back. It is out
of character with the neighbourhood. This does very little to address the parking issue - adding
2 more units, albeit some are smaller units, and 3 more parking spaces. This design allows
for one parking spot per unit, which means no one will have more than one vehicle and no one
will have overnight visitors in the winter months. There is no parking for trades people other
than on the street. We already have problems now when occasionally our garbage doesn't get
picked up because the truck can't get down the street because of people parking on it. The
existing townhouse developments on the street, which do have visitor parking, regularly have
residents parking on the street for days at a time. What will it look like when we have 24 more
Page 313 of 336
families on our small street with not enough on-site parking?
I don't expect this letter to make any difference. The developer will eventually be allowed to
put too many units on too small a lot and we will have to live with it.
Thanks for keeping me in the loop, though.
Debbie
From: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Sent: May 4, 2022 2:09 PM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: 42 Windom Road -Zoning By-law Amendment
Hello,
I am reaching out to you in response to the proposed development at 42 Windom Road. We circulated a
notice to you in January 2021, and you responded with questions and comments at that time.
The applicant has responded to comments about building design, setbacks, and parking and has updated
their site plan. Please see plan attached. If you have any additional comments, please email me by May
13th, 2022.
Thank you,
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Page 314 of 336
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
(519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
Page 315 of 336
L
X
rr
, Q)
V)
To: Eric Schnedr
Planner
200 King St West, P.O. Box 1118
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Dear Sir
Abut The 42 Windom Rd 3 Story building is
Way too high, and 22- unit way to many. The nest
To 42 Windom is 48 Windom 2 time is big land
And only Have 12 unit and 12 parking place. And
No place For visitors to park and no place to put
The snow. And school days the street is fool of cars.
Sometime when i not home cars ark in m drivewa
We own lot
No snow removals that place look like a prison.?
Only benefit builder.
Feb 08 2021
1 A . . . .. 1 1
Yours ttwy
x%19 ay./ l%77,cAt4�.a
Page 317 of 336
From: Debbie Evans < >
Sent: Friday, January 22, 20216:47 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Debbie Evans
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Rezoning 42 Windom Rd (again) (ZBA20/017/W/ES)
A few years ago, the previous owner of 42 Windom Rd had the property rezoned, in theory
because it was only zoned for 3 units, there were currently 5 units in the building and they
wanted to make it compliant with its current configuration. At the time, I commented on the
rezoning application, saying that most likely the reason for rezoning has nothing to do with
compliance, but more likely is to make it easier to sell the property and open the possibilities
for future development of more units. Guess what? That's exactly what is happening.
We already have a lot of parking issues on this street, particularly with the existing multi -unit
properties, including the residents at 42 Windom Road, parking on the street for days, around
the clock, and sometimes weeks at a time. Kitchener by law does come by when there is a
complaint, marks the tires, and people run out and move their cars temporarily. After bylaw
returns, they move the cars back and there they stay. What is going to happen when there are
22 more families on the street with only 21 parking spots and no place for visitors? Many
families have multiple vehicles. Very few have none. Are people only ever going to ever have
visitors for 3 hours or less, and never overnight in the winter? Where are visitors going to
park? There is no overnight on -street parking allowed in the winter, and only 3 -hour day time
parking. Reducing the parking requirements from 39 spaces to 21 is ridiculous. There should at
least be one spot for each unit and some visitor parking.
Furthermore, lots 32, 39 and 31 on this street have similar or even larger lots than 42. My lot,
43 is fairly large, but not quite as big as these others. If the owners of 42 get approval to build
22 units, does that set a precedent to make it easier for these other owners to get zoning
changes to build more multi -unit dwellings on their properties? If the owner of 42 can do this,
Page 318 of 336
why shouldn't everyone else with a large lot also be able to? How many units can this small
street support?
In conclusion, I fully expected when the first rezoning happened, that the property would be
sold and redeveloped, but 22 units is a lot. And not even having enough parking spots for each
unit to have a place to park is ridiculous. Please keep me informed of what is happening with
this property. If this is the direction the street is going, maybe I should ask the developers of 42
if they want to buy my property too and I'll move somewhere else.
Debbie Evans
Kitchener ON
Page 319 of 336
From: Earl Campbell < >
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 202110:06 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 42 Windom Road (KW Windom Inc.
Earl Campbell & Sandra Allen
Definitely against such a proposal.
#1 Parking. Parking in the area is always an issue. During the school year a lot of parents forget how to
park or do not want their child to have to walk 20 feet more. In many cases the wide streets get reduced
to just barely getting between the parked cars.
We get multiple flyers each year asking for parking during the winter months while parking restrictions
are enforced, reducing the number of parking spots required will only increase the issue.
#2 Traffic. There is an issue during school hours and the city is very well aware of it as they did a traffic
study a couple years ago and implemented traffic calming measures. Be it during school time or not
there is a big traffic issue at the corner of Thaler and Fairway Rd. Traffic gets congested and leads to
people taking chances, I am surprised there are not more accidents there. People turning left from
Thaler are crossing two lanes of traffic to turn left. Visibility is restricted due property obstructions on
the south east corner. Not to mention traffic turning left off of Fairway Rd tends to lead to cars behind
darting into the right lane to go around the turning vehicle.
Increasing the number of people in this area will only lead to more traffic issues. Please I invite you to
come and sit at the corner after school lets out or a little later when work tends to get out. It is an
Page 320 of 336
awkward corner as it is not 90 degrees. It really should be a right turn only off of Thaler.
#3 Population. It is very disconcerting to see the general trend in the area. Where once the duplex was
the go -to multiple building we are seeing people that don't live here and are only in it to make a buck
tearing down a single home dwelling and putting up a quadplex. We have had 3 along Morgan Ave.
already and as I said it doesn't affect the people doing this then we will surely see more .... as long as you
are not affected it's ok right?
The rules were originally put in place to help protect the city and people from potential abuse of a
situation. This type of request would not be tolerated in affluent areas with potential increased risk to
people safety. (school kid, residents and general traffic along Fairway Rd)
We are against any exception to facilitate a change just to make more money at the other residents in
the area's expense.
Thank you,
Earl Campbell
Earl Campbell
Page 321 of 336
Statement of Confidentiality: The information contained in this email message and any attachments may
be confidential
and legally privileged and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not an intended recipient,
please: (1) notify me
immediately by replying to the message (2) do not use disseminate, distribute, or reproduce any part of
the message or
attachment; and (3) destroy all copies of this message and attachments.
To UNSUBSCRIBE from receiving, commercial electronic messages from Earl Campbell, please reply to
this email with
"UNSUBSCRIBE" in subject line
E&OE
Page 322 of 336
From: Klein, Ron < >
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 20213:09 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Lisa Brown
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 42 Windom road
Hello,
I am reaching out in regard to the proposed changes to the current zoning bylaws at
42 Windom road. I currently reside at in a single detached home.
I am concerned about the size of the building Floor space ratio, the number of units and
especially concerned about the parking reduction per unit. Parking has always been
problematic on our street. I fear this development will cause this to be unsustainable. Not
having enough parking for these units as well as the increase in visitors' vehicles, will severely
limit the ability to have visitor parking for the existing residents. I understand the need for more
affordable housing, but developments should not negatively impact longtime current residents.
I hope you consider the impact this will have on the neighbor's and keep the FSR of 60% and
the minimum 1.75 parking spaces per unit.
Thank you so much for your time.
Page 323 of 336
From: Deb Devall < >
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 20215:56 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 42 Windom Rd Planning
Hi Eric
We have received the information regarding future plans for 42 Windom Rd. My husband and I reside at
and have been living at that location for the past 15 years. We are opposed to the idea of
building a new 22 unit multiple dwelling unit. We are opposed to allowing the zoning by-law to build a 3
story multi dwelling complex to occupy 75 % of the total land area as we feel this will look very ugly and
will consume a lot more traffic to a small rd. We already have the subsidized housing unit on this road
and townhouse units at the end. Windom Rd is used by the young children to come and go to school
every day and we already have many parents parking on both sides of the road to pick up and drop off
their child twice daily.
We would like to be updated on further developments regarding 42 Windom Rd and would like a forum
to voice our concerns.
Deb and Steve Devall
Page 324 of 336
From: Klein, Ron < >
Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 10:42 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Lisa Brown
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 42 Windom Road- Zoning By-law Amendment
Good Morning Eric,
Thank you for taking the time to listen to the concerns we have regarding the impact of this
proposed development. I am still quite worried about the lack of visitor parking for 24 units
(none). As you are aware, all the longtime residents on the street have lost a parking spot on
their driveways to accommodate a sidewalk and apron. In addition to losing a driveway spot the
road has been narrowed and only allows a very small number of parking spots for the entire
street. These few spots are highly sought after and will negatively affect our ability to have our
own visitors park on the street. Will there be something in place to address this? i.e visitor
parking permits for existing residents? Parking is most definitely my biggest apprehension going
forward with this project. Hopefully this can be resolved.
Thank you again for your time.
From: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 2:09 PM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: 42 Windom Road -Zoning By-law Amendment
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
Hello,
Page 325 of 336
I am reaching out to you in response to the proposed development at 42 Windom Road. We circulated a
notice to you in January 2021, and you responded with questions and comments at that time.
The applicant has responded to comments about building design, setbacks, and parking and has updated
their site plan. Please see plan attached. If you have any additional comments, please email me by May
13th, 2022.
Thank you,
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
(519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
[kitchener.ca] [kitchener.ca] [facebook.com] [twitter.com] [kitchener.ca]
[youtube.com] [flickr.com] [instagram.com]
Page 326 of 336
From: Randy Linseman <
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 20211:14 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL]
Re: Zoning By -Law Amendment - 42 Windom Rd. (ZBA20/017/W/es )
Hello
My name is Randy Linseman and I have been living at since 2001.
1 am responding on this issue for ( motherinlaw )and myself as I am in the
process of purchasing this property.
My concerns are as follows:
- the building itself is way too large for the size of the lot. Parking on this street is now a problem
with overflow of cars because of unts having two cars .This is both a big problem
in summer and winter for people to find spots to park with the current City of Kitchener bylaws.
Also Howard Robertson School backs onto the end of Windom Rd. which causes a large traffic
congestion twice a day when parents are dropping their children off for school. So by adding
21 plus cars to the area is going to cause big problems
the present garbage pickup has changed the pickup times as they are unable to drive down the street
at school pickup and dropoff times.
- I would like to know what type of garbage collection is going to be used and the location
- I am now having problems with the people from the apartment at the back of my property with people
throwing garbage over the fence.
- this property at 42 Windom Rd. would be suited for at max a six plex
RandyLinseman
Page 327 of 336
From: Randy Linseman <
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 202110:49 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 42 Windom Rd.
Eric
Concerns:
#1- Parking - everyone who rents an apartment has the right to own a vehicle and have
a place to park. Parents dropping & picking their children cause a traffic congestion
to the point where the parents are yelling and close to fist fights. So by adding
21 + cars to the area will make things worse.
#2- Children - the layout of the building and parking lot cover most of the lot. It looks like the only
place for the under ground garbage to go is at the end of the parking lot. That
leaves the back west corner for any children to play. Example: 22 units with 1
child = 22 children, where are they going to play. I do not want them in my yard
as I would be liable for any injuries.
# 3- Fencing - right now there is no fence between the properties. There are trees and shrubs
which keep privacy between the lots. Will there be some kind of fence built.
I am not against an apartment up to a 6-12 units . The building being proposed is way to big for
property. I feel that the big builders are trying to cram as may people in as small of a space as possible
just for the money. I am sure I won't see any of them living here.
Thankyou
Randy Linseman
Page 328 of 336
From: Randy Linseman <
Sent: Monday, February 22, 202111:12 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Re:
I forgot to mention one more concern which is snow removal, the previous owner used to use a snow
blower to clean
the driveway by blowing it to each side. The new owner ( Jackman ) now has a bobcat come in to clear
the snow. This
winter has been a light one as per other years. My concern is where the snow is going to go ? Right now
they are piling
the snow at the side of the road. The driveway in the proposal will be approx. 200 ft. plus the area of
the 21 parking
spaces.The piling of the snow could be a safety issue for the children and for the cars leaving the
driveway. (blindspot)
Thankyou
Randy Linseman
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 2:15 PM Randy Linseman < > wrote:
Eric
Received the report . I will go through the report and get back to you
with my comments as soon as possible.
Thank -you
Randy
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 10:21 AM Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca> wrote:
Hi Randy, it was great to speak with you on the phone today. Please see attached parking justification
study submitted by the applicant. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Page 329 of 336
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
(519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
From: Randy Linseman < >
Sent: Friday, February 12, 20219:34 AM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re:
Sorry home number is -
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 8:06 AM Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca> wrote:
Ok great I can call you at 10 AM. What number can I reach you at?
Eric Schneider
From: Randy Linseman < >
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 20219:06 PM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re:
Hi
I would be available from 10 till noon or 3 till 5. Look forward to our conversation.
Randy
Page 330 of 336
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 3:34 PM Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca> wrote:
Hi Randy,
Thank you for your response and sharing your concerns.
I am wondering if you would be available for a phone conversation tomorrow to discuss further.
Please let me know what phone number I can reach you at and a good time to call.
Regards,
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
(519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
From: Randy Linseman <
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 20211:14 PM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]
Re: Zoning By -Law Amendment - 42 Windom Rd. (ZBA20/017/W/es )
Hello
My name is Randy Linseman and I have been living at . since 2001.
I am responding on this issue for ( motherinlaw )and myself as I am in the
process of purchasing this property.
My concerns are as follows:
- the building itself is way too large for the size of the lot. Parking on this street is now a problem
with overflow of cars because of unts having two cars .This is both a big problem
Page 331 of 336
in summer and winter for people to find spots to park with the current City of Kitchener bylaws.
Also Howard Robertson School backs onto the end of Windom Rd. which causes a large traffic
congestion twice a day when parents are dropping their children off for school. So by adding
21 plus cars to the area is going to cause big problems
the present garbage pickup has changed the pickup times as they are unable to drive down the
street at school pickup and dropoff times.
- I would like to know what type of garbage collection is going to be used and the location
- I am now having problems with the people from the apartment at the back of my property with
people throwing garbage over the fence.
- this property at 42 Windom Rd. would be suited for at max a six plex
RandyLinseman
Page 332 of 336
DSD -2022-348 Attachment "A"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
, 2022
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known
as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — Windom KW Inc.
— 42 Windom Road)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as
follows:
1. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 239 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is hereby
amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as
Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Low Rise Residential Five
Zone (RES -5) with Site Specific Provisions (223) and (232) to Low Rise Residential Five Zone
(RES -5) with Site Specific Provision (342).
2. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (342) thereto as
follows:
"342. Notwithstanding Tables 5-5 and 7-6 of this By-law within the lands zoned RES -5 and
shown as affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 239 of
Appendix `A', the following special regulations shall apply:
a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 0.7.
b) The minimum required parking shall be 1 space per dwelling unit.
C) The minimum required visitor parking shall be 8% of required parking.
d) The minimum side yard setback shall be 2.5 metres."
3. This amending By-law shall come into force on the day that By-law 2022-040
(Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) Stage 2b — Applying New
Page 333 of 336
DSD -2022-348 Attachment "A"
Residential Zones on Properties) as it applies to the subject lands comes into effect.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
2022.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 334 of 336
�Z w o a
z
� O w
N 0 J� wo
J W _ E
N
O Z W Z Q LLo
�— Z:)O Z O N z o
U
�v> vQ Z ON D >-Q U) N
z0coOf zJ w O J H Q N 00 W
L Z— — 0zw JUU)Wz
co O> O_ z> N ON O Z Q R ZLLJ ZO w Q
aXO�OOQ LLIw Of N O � N w I`
J (n Q N d' — d' Z W N w g O O( Z CO U`
fn JajXaw x 0> X O w w O O Z
m QwO�wa w w cn g U O U Of� z p z
LV Z� of < Q Q Q Q w OU Q 0 U d W N Q z W N Q
~ W J J V H H H H O J �' O D W Q O z < L J
Q ~ a Q Z Q p Z Z Z Z Q W 2 0 Z af Z X N O m d
H W (nU—W UzZ uj W W W W- U Z W W Dui N N Q
U g UJ UJ ao ———— c� O o w X a �DwZ Z =w
W a 0 -IL IL2c5 w w w w �- N z 0 (7paw ~ �g
N ax Z F ^^�
m W W O H 0 Of= 0 O J J N af Z 2 Q U W Z iaf
md'd'—zO—Zaf } ch v u� co } O O U X U OUw� Q
U) QQwQ�Qa m af af af af m U U Z O Ncn01 0IL
2 }'p
1 -'--N Z 0 U)M W Z
W
�
� W �>
LI?
Q Of
Q pw
F-
< Q♦•
IL
LLI
OpM��dd�
w
d ZO LL
i LL
N O
O
0 V� y'��p cc o
N
�UN
)
0
/A �? w N
o Ili
LO F- O (fl
Ali
W O
ci
o W
� � D
a.
Im
M
JILU
U 0
a cD Z
a N a O
X
1 N
N
N, 6C96 Y8s
n/ ",7 /
LLI
Z v' Z w o
LLL'.I Q W O Z W o)LLI
J W O N Z
Z p J w -o
O W< Z N WN N N LL E
W O v Z ZO ON O Of D ; z o
>_ N� W O F U x O Q Cn N
N
LL Z W Z Z N } J J J J
o� Q O >O ZW NQH �QQQQ ago W
U JU O Z W J U U w z H H H H
N z > Q> NOZZ Qofz�iwzzzz Q
W Q Q W N O O U W N W I`
J - d W E W D W N W 2 O O O W W W W Z CO � U`
fn w U 0U xO�X �O��wY-OfofOf w O O z
m� �_ �� �LLLLU U Uwwww Of� z O z
W O W U Lu Q Q Q Q u� O J x W Q U U U U �NQz W N Q
Q awe z z z z J w m= of x of afOXri Z m La
z UNUU w w w w � U z x� w���� oW0Of NN N Q
U LU ui O H��H M0000N0W�XaOOOO �JZw =Z
W o�ui
J uj(n< U) W W W W Z5 Z5 F/5J N Z O N M V N 0��2 z
00 WwQUxch0x af x af N (� (� (� (� zxQU LLI Z �af
�wY-' W♦-NOH } (h V N (O >L O O 0 X 0 W W W W OUB♦- Q
U) QQ����H� m Y- af x af m U U z O NUOY LU IL
0 L �w
Z 0 U)1 W
W z `i U
W y U) W >
W O Q C ��
'n Q O U)
LU
LU
w Q z
C'4 J J - W
d
1 } a
0
o
U
ti z [Z
1 OLL
N O
� 1
LO
W O 0 y��� L
V w N
cli
QQ�� /AI w N
�� -v
N Y- O
Q W O
1 �P W
6i
Q H
U Q
U) 0
1
1 fn Q'
z
ti
1 Ln L? LO
1 U)
1 w� z D
' —
1 ep0��
1 Z Y o
1 I 0
1 w Nry p O z
%azo
' N
U
Z 1
04
!1! O.. s
-- -
- -- -- -- - --- ----