HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2022-461 - 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South - Zoning By-law Amendment Application - ZBA22-009-O-ES - Ihor Dotsenko and Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc.Staff Report
I
K Tc�i irrarR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.co
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: December 12, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext.
7070
PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 6
DATE OF REPORT: November 15, 2022
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-461
SUBJECT: 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South
Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/009/0/ES
Ihor Dotsenko and Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/009/0/ES requesting to amend Zoning
By-law 85-1, for Ihor Dotsenko and Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc. be approved in
the form shown in the Proposed `Proposed By-law', and `Map No. V attached to Report DSD -
2022 -461 as Attachment `A'; and
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/009/0/ES requesting to amend Zoning
By-law 2019-051, for Ihor Dotsenko and Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc. be
approved in the form shown in the Proposed `Proposed By-law', and `Map No. 1' attached to
Report DSD -2022-461 as Attachment `A'; 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-law 2022-040
(Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) Stage 2b — Applying New Residential
Zones on Properties) in relation to the subject lands have been withdrawn or decided and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
ZBA22/009/0/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 1257-1265 Ottawa Street
South.
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 in our community.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 4of410
Community engagement included:
o circulation of a preliminary notice to property owners within 240 metres of the subject
site;
o installation of a large billboard notice sign on the property;
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 240 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 November 18, 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:
Change the zoning in Zoning By-law 85-1 from `Residential Three Zone (R-3)' to `Residential
Six Zone (R-6)' with Special Regulation Provision 784R;
Change the zoning in Zoning By-law 2019-051, currently under appeal, from `Low Rise
Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' to `Low Rise Residential Five Zone (RES -5)' with Site -
Specific Provision (354);
Facilitate the construction of a 20 -unit multiple dwelling.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kitchener has received an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment from Ihor
Dotsenko and Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc. for a development concept that proposes
a three-storey multiple dwelling building with twenty (20) residential units and twenty-three (23)
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).
Site Context
The subject lands are comprised of two lots addressed as 1257 and 1265 Ottawa Street South. The
subject lands are on the south side of Ottawa Street South near the intersection of two Regional
roads - Fischer Hallman Road and Ottawa Street South. The lot area of the subject site is
approximately 0.2 hectares and the lot frontage is 40.8 metres. Each lot contains a single detached
dwelling. The surrounding neighbourhood contains a mix of low-rise multiple dwellings, semi-
detached, and single detached dwellings, and institutional uses.
Page 5 of 410
Figure 1 — Existing Single Detached Dwelling at 1257 Ottawa Street South
Figure 2 — Existing Single Detached Dwelling on Site at 1265 Ottawa Street South
Page 6of410
VAI,
7
. -..i �s'
ri ti r
SUBJECT
AREA
rY a 1
r,
a}
yµyfw
w�. { V y" k��•"� I
Figure 3 - Location Map: 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South
REPORT:
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing two (2) buildings on site, consolidate the
properties together, and develop the subject property with a 3 -storey, 20 -unit multiple dwelling
building. Twenty-three (23) surface parking spaces, including three visitor parking spaces and one
barrier free parking space are proposed. Twenty (20) bicycle parking spaces, including fourteen (14)
enclosed and secured spaces for residents, and six (6) short-term spaces on an outdoor bicycle
rack, are proposed.
Through the review and evaluation of this application, the development concept was slightly revised
from its initial submission. The original concept proposed a smaller amenity space, and the parallel
parking closer to the street with limited opportunity for landscape screening. The revised concept
shifts the parallel parking spaces further from the street line in order to allow for greater opportunity
for landscape screening of parking spaces. The revised concept includes improvements to the
garbage truck turnaround area relocates the outdoor bicycle rack and shifts the access aisle for the
barrier free space into the existing walkway area to allow for a larger and more functional amenity
area.
Page 7 of 410
■1111111 1111111■ ■
Figure 5- Revised Development Concept
Page 8 of 410
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 complete and 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 major commercial plaza (Sunrise Centre) on
the corner of Fischer Hallman Road and Ottawa Street South, Windale Park, and the Laurentian
Hydro Corridor Trail. 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
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,
Page 9 of 410
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 application conforms 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. No Official Plan amendment is required to implement
the Zoning By-law Amendment application.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested zoning by-law amendment will facilitate 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 2, 3, and iXpress Routes 201 and 205. 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 character of 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 10 of 410
The proposed development concept includes a 3 storey building that orients massing and unit
entrances towards the street line along Ottawa Street South. Street fronting articulation includes at
grade patios as well as second and third floor balconies. Barrier free connectivity throughout the site
is provided through pedestrian walkways from the rear unit entrances alongside the building and in
front of the street fronting units, both leading to the sidewalk on Ottawa Street South. On-site amenity
area is achieved through at-grade passive amenity space at the rear of the building, as well as
private unit balconies and at grade patios.
Housin
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 is a "missing middle" housing type and provides 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-law Amendment:
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 Three Zone (R-3)' in Zoning By-law 85-1. The
applicant has requested to change the zoning to `Residential Six Zone (R-6)' and add a Special
Regulation Provision (784R) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The requested change in zoning category is to
permit the proposed use of a "Multiple Dwelling".
Special Regulation Provision (784R)
a. Permit a Floor Space Ratio of 0.63
b. Establish a Parking rate of 1.15 parking spaces per dwelling unit (1 per dwelling unit and 0.15
visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit)
Page 11 of 410
Zonina By-law 2019-051
The subject lands are zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051
(currently under appeal).
The applicant has requested to change the zoning to `Low Rise Residential Five Zone (RES -5)' and
add a Site Specific Provision (354) in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The requested change in zoning
category is to permit the proposed use of a "Multiple Dwelling".
Site-Specicfic Provision (354)
a. Permit a Floor Space Ratio of 0.63
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 will be required to consider an increase in the Floor
Space Ratio greater than 0.75. "
Increases in the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) 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 is made up of a mix of low-rise housing types, including
multiple dwellings. Directly across Ottawa Street South (25 Valleyview Road) is a 29 -unit townhome
multiple dwelling development. The surrounding blocks also contain single and semi-detached
dwellings. Most dwellings in the area are 1.5-3 storeys. Therefore, the proposed building at 3 storeys
and 20 -units is similar to, and compatible with, the surrounding neighbourhood in the opinion of
Planning Staff.
Parking (Zoning By-law 85-1)
The proposed parking rate meets the minimum required parking rate in Zoning By-law 2019-051
(1.15 spaces per unit). Therefore, a request for parking reduction is only required for Zoning By-law
85-1. The proposed rate of 1.15 spaces per unit would result in a total of twenty-three (23) parking
spaces; twenty (20) spaces for residents and three (3) visitor spaces. In addition to vehicle parking
spaces, the applicant is proposing ten (10) 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. Staff is of the opinion that the
proposed rate of 1.15 parking spaces per dwelling unit as required in Zoning By-law 2019-051 is
appropriate for this site.
Page 12 of 410
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the Zoning By-law Amendment was undertaken on June 1, 2022 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.
The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment:
• Planning Opinion Report
Prepared by Patterson Planning Consultants Inc., April, 2022
• Urban Design Brief
Prepared by Patterson Planning Consultants Inc., April, 2022
• Site Grading, Servicing, and Storm Water Management Report
Prepared by Reinders and Law, January 31, 2022
• Site Concept Plan
Prepared by Reinders and Law, December 5, 2021, Revised: October 21, 2022
• Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan and Arborist Report
Prepared by OMC Landscape Architecture, July 10, 2022
• Noise Study
Prepared by JPE Engineering, January 28, 2022
• Salt Management Plan
Prepared by Reinders and Law, January 29, 2022
Community Input and Staff Response:
Staff received written responses from 13 residents with respect to 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
Staff Comment
Traffic on Ottawa Street is already
The intersection of Ottawa and Fischer Hallman is one of
busy, this development will make it
the busiest in the Region. The number of units for the
worse
proposed development is low and does not warrant a
detailed traffic study. The addition of 20 units is not
expected to have adverse impacts on traffic in the area.
The development will result in forward egress onto
Ottawa Street South, rather than the existing conditions of
vehicle backing out of driveways.
This development is too large for
The proposed development will remain a low-rise
this site
residential use, which is permitted in the Low Rise
Residential land use designation in the Official Plan. The
scale and massing is compatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood and the use is present in the surrouinding
neighbourhood.
Page 13 of 410
Privacy and rear parking lot
Landscaped areas have been included between the
parking area and abutting lands, to provide a buffer
between the asphalt area and the property lines.
Landscaping and a 1.8 metre (6 foot) high fence will help
to screen the parking area. In regards to concerns about
privacy, the rear facing balconies are located
approximately 25 metres from the rear lot line, whereas
the minimum is 7.5 metres. This will help to mitigate
overlook concerns as they will be located 25 metres from
the rear lot line and provide an approximate building
separation of 46 metres from the abutting homes on Nine
Pines Road.
Garbage storage will become a
Garbage storage has been detailed on site plan to include
nuisance for adjacent neighbours
deep well units. These units store waste deep
underground and in a sealed container, presenting less
nuisance issues such as wildlife foraging than traditional
dumpster or roll out bins. The deep wells also provide for
less frequent pick ups, resulting in less impact to adjacent
properties.
Water drainage is an issue and
The proposed development would be required to install
backyards on this block get flooded
stormwater management infrastructure to collect
in the spring
rainwater and store on-site or discharge to municipal
infrastructure.
Parking on site and on -street
The proposed parking on site meets the 2019 Zoning By -
parking
law rates and alternative modes of transportation is
available in the area. On -Street parking is subject to City
restrictions of 3 hours at a time, making it only viable for
short term visits, not residential use.
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,
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. The proposed application represents an opportunity to provide `missing middle' housing
that addresses a need in our community.
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
Page 14 of 410
owners within 240 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 November 18, 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 240 metres of the subject lands on June 1, 2022. In response to this circulation, staff received
written responses from 12 residents, which are included in Attachment `D'. A Neighbourhood
Meeting was held on November 8, 2022 and attended by approximately 10 residents.
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: Malone -Wright, Tina — Interim 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 15 of 410
follows:
DSD -2022-461 Attachment "A"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
12022
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 — Ihor Dotsenko and
Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc.
— 1257 &1265 Ottawa Street South)
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 68 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 Three Zone (R-3) to Residential Six
Zone (R-6) with Special Regulation Provision 784R.
2. Appendix D of By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 784R thereto as follows:
784. 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 0.63.
b) The minimum required parking shall be 1.15 spaces per dwelling unit."
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
12022.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 16 of 410
DSD -2022-461 Attachment "A"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
12022
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 — Ihor Dotsenko
and Yuliya Dotsenko and 9474765 Canada Inc.
— 1257 &1265 Ottawa Street South)
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 68 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 Two
Zone (RES -2) to Low Rise Residential Five Zone (RES -5) with Site Specific Provision (354).
2. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (354) thereto as
follows:
"354. Notwithstanding Table 7-6 of this By-law within the lands zoned RES -5 and shown as
affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 68 of Appendix `A', the
following special regulations shall apply:
a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 0.63."
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
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 17 of 410
�Z z w U a
O Z Wo Z W � W �
W N O Z N 0 Z p Of w w -o
O W Q Q Z ON W ri ON Z LL o E
O O LLo Z W O d' NNIN Z a O I o� Q O o
N � W O z H W (n W 2 O ♦- N
O W Z Z N 0 Z } J J J J vJ
m Q O_ Q U O Q Q Q Q 00 O W
♦- J J (� a (n U Z Z Z Z Z � Of U) _O
N
Q Q W
Z Q U w z U W O W W W W J N (L' �
Q CD
W d IF- af W- U 0� af Z m � x Q O CD
(D U
fn >L w o_ U_ COQ= w w wWOfOf Of Of W O g_ z N z
a m U O J Uox QQzww w w wc00o z J o O N z
W Q W W U �{i (Y J O (n (n (n U) ZLLI Q
a. 1- U mr w o f w O Q (� (�N d d d WOa0 Z O m La
a a Q W m Z Z X N O J U
z� U) U) °' Z�(D z���� �Z0Xf N U- w N Q 4%1=
~ W W N p UJ 0 (7 Q EL EL 0 0 O O � � Za = z
� z� O R (n N v Z Z O O W N ri v ui CD Q EL W z ^ Z G=i g
00 wwOui ���x Uzi �zu) U) u) u) zxQU '> LLI Z ��
ui
� LL of m O O O z zN U 02 Q � � � OUuH �%' � W Va
ZNO O� NUOY
D +_� o
snO 1 111111 N W Z U
H
X085771..., LU >
U) O Q �
o .�r.r 3:a o U)
Z `
N uJ N L U)J -�
J LLJ
W EL
LU
1 ] m U O
J w
w
J 2 Z V o
I �
O IL
u
I O
I O
1
I N O
III
I s
I I ti um
I I 1 m
I I i ul
I �
�, �°� IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIII uuuuuuuuuuluulluuuuuuluu O� 1 ,/
(�� VIIII r 1 N 2f N
o
o N
��� uuuuuulu°uuuuul o 0
2 w
cc w m
SIJ 2 -
O Voll p
� � z
1 z O
y IIIIIIIIII (IIIIIIIIIII
LU
1 IIVpIIIVlllllllllllll
Q
u U Q
D
� 111111 IIIIIIII mull°luu°IIIIIIIIII U)
II III IIIIIIIIII
w mum°°°°°IIIIIIIIII
m
(III IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1 IIIIII
Q
� 1111111
� J
M_
' N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIID IIIIIIII
u
N
111 IIIIVIIIII
� 'Z
�I u
I
VIII II
I Y
1 III
r
U
Q
luu dill I Z �
u Q
z m
ui _ 1 um10
W
I
muuu Q
N III
I �
w O �Z Q
VIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
.n-�.. N Z � U O
- - - _ 89 7na3 _ _ _ _ _ L9 37110 o_S - - - - - - - - � �
9ti 3 a3H�S WIIT" - - Lb 3711O3H
LO a O � c�
x
VI
VIII uuuuuuuuuuuililllluuuullw ��� W LOuuuuuuluu m �„ Q — 06
W W
4,�> w Q
uuuuuuuuuuUlu L)
uuuuu°uuuuuuuuuuuuuu 1 �
O
�" 9 , uuuuuu uuu o
w
Z W W Z
z ON 0
ch O OJ w z > 0
(n Q Z Woof IN Of
Z z - W
w U) LLI
0 O z N 0 U) >- 1—
Of
Z w NN Q U 0 ��
La H J U
coo WWZ H 0 Z 0 W QafwZw wof
W z 0 U N Q N Z U W 2- O w p 2 Q Z W Z W d' O �' Q Q Of
U) JX 0rj
LLI
prxOX OQ0w WW
a m Q w o N 0 J J J U U= U U Z
LU nZ Q U Z OU a D J Q Q p
Q<<La a s
IN
W Q = Q a ♦- ♦- ~ J w Lu m U U
a z �w0 ,;CISU)W-www�0z2 wwz
H W W D W W= Z< 0 0 0 N p W O� Q d d W
LU 0 Of � a Q w w w N v z z 002
00 ww0Of �z0=OfOf x 22270zofofz
�WOf0——Nc�ch'IT CO}o00U=0cncnQ
U QQWI—o0—dda� a�a om000ZZN002
p _
a\I
1
�� �� � .,���Illlllllllllllplpl
mli muuuuuuuuuuluuuuuuil�
uuuuuuuuu8umuuuuuuuuu ;
1 Lb
1
717
WIW
LU LU
1
yly
1
1
M
O
U
O
0)
O
N0
Q
z
Lr
W
Q
Of
Z
0
Q
0
U)
�
LU
O
O
Q
�I
Ljj W o
x
LL O E
O
N
m
N
ppu
W Q
N
O
U
�
w
wed
U >-
z CO
U x
~ U
J
U
O
O
LLJ
C7
Z
w (7
LLI Z
g z
J o
O
N
z
z
Z
ZXN
w�oa
Q
z O
U-
p
w
Q
N
Q
Lap0
�F-
w0Of
Z LU
j W Z
ci
NN
`
Z
W
�
ui a z
Q U
^
�O
�
Z
H
�
�
Z 2
N
LU
Z
U)
�uviOY
��
O
a
a
YU)
Zp
Q
CW
G
Z
4.0 D
(n
w
m
W
HQ
x
Z
w
U
-
m
44
U
Q
II W d
>
Of
0
O
O
Q
uwi
N
YC)
J
Z
Z
W Q
C
O
Q
WW
U
Q
() o
o
m
U
J
Q
w
>
LLI
LL
N
m �C14
O
O
N
ppu
o
�
0
IIIIIIIIIIIIu�llllll
O
U
�
w
wed
w
0W- O
m
�
u� H O
W O
LLJ
O
z
Z uulpuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumull"muu
—
O W
J
W
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
U)
0
111111111111 001111111111111111 u
Q
Il IIIIII�
Lc)
i
—
J
N
U)
O
a
YU)
Zp
Q
m
O
HQ
Z
c)Lr)
H
-
m
44
r--
O
m
II W d
O
O04
rn
06
N
YC)
Ii
LY
W Q
C
O
U)
U
Q
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
fora development in yourneighbourhood
i
1257 Et 1265 Ottawa Street South �%
Have Your Voice Heard!
Concept Drawing
II)iii/ eLLiru g II a'ti :: cif 0 20 � Iii... i1,:d
Date: December 12, 2022
Time: 3:00 p.m.
Location: Council Chambers,
Kitchener City Hall
200 King Street west
V'irWalZoom Fleeting
To view the staff report, agenda,
meetingdetails, start i this item
or to appear s a delegation, isi :
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal rights, visit:
www.kitchener.ca/
Pla n n i ngAppl ications
or contact:
Eric Schneider, Senior Planner
519.741.2200 x 7843
eric.schneider@ kitchener.ca
A Zoning By-law Amendment Application will be considered to facilitate the
redevelopment of the site by proposing to remove the 2 existing single detached
dwellings and replacing them with a 3 -storey multiple dwelling building having 20
dwelling units and a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.63 instead of 0.6.
Page 20 of 410
Eric Schneider
Senior Planner
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Schneider,
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2C 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
MonikaOviedo226-753-830
File: ZBA 11* •
November 1
Re: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA 22/009
1257-1265 Ottawa
Patterson Planning Cr O Scott Patterson) or
behalf of AgrawalReal
Estate
CITY OF KITCHENER
Patterson Planning Consultants on behalf of Agrawal Real Estate Investments has
submitted a Zoning By-law Amendment for a development proposal at 1257-1265
Ottawa Street South (subject lands) in the City of Kitchener.
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is to rezone the subject lands from the
Residential Three (R-3) Zone in Zoning By-law 85-1 and Low Rise Residential Two
(RES -2) in Zoning By-law 2019-051 to Low Rise Residential Five (RES -5) in Zoning By-
law 19-051. In addition, a site specific provision has been proposed to allow for an
increased Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.63 (whereas 0.6 is permitted).
The effect of the Zoning By-law Amendment will see the demolition of two existing
single detached dwellings and the construction of a three-storey building containing 20
residential units. Twenty-three vehicular parking spaces are proposed, including three
visitor spaces and one barrier -free space.
Document Number: 4213078 Version: 1
Page 21 of 410
Regional Comments
Consistency with Provincial Legislation and Regional Official Plan Conformity
The subject lands are designated "Urban Area" and "Built -Up Area" on Schedule 3a of
the Regional Official Plan (ROP) and the site is designated Low Rise Residential in the
City of Kitchener Official Plan. Regional staff understand that the proposal contributes
to the density in the Built -Up Area.
Within the Urban Area, the Region directs the majority of growth to the built up area
through intensification. Focal points for intensification include the Region's Urban
Growth Centers, Major Transit Station Areas, Reurbanization Corridors, Major Local
Nodes and Urban Designated Greenfield Areas. These areas are planned to have a
more compact form with a mix of employment, housing and services in close proximity
of each other and higher frequency transit.
Regional staff understand that the development proposal is located in the Built -Up Area
of the City of Kitchener and that the proposed development will contribute to the
minimum target for intensification established for the Built -Up Area within the A Place to
Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Regional Official Plan.
Hydrogeology and Source Water Protection
Staff note that a provisional risk management plan has been negotiated for the
development and that a valid Section 59 notice was issued on February 2, 2022.
The Risk Management Officer has no further comments at this time.
Corridor Management
Transportation Noise
Regional staff have reviewed the study entitled "Environmental Noise Study 1257-1265
Ottawa Street South, Kitchener, Ontario" dated January 28, 2022, by JPE Engineering.
The report was prepared in support of the ZBA application 22/09 and accepted by
Regional Staff.
Based on the findings of the report it is determined that the development is feasible with
the inclusion of various noise attenuation measures.
The following recommendations of the noise study, pertaining to the transportation
noise, will be required to be implemented through a registered agreement with the
Region of Waterloo through a future condominium or consent application and site plan
application:
The developer agrees to implement the recommendations of the report "Environmental
Noise Study Proposed Residential Development 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South,
Kitchener" as prepared by JPE Engineering and further agrees that:
Document Number: 4213078 Version: 1
Page 22 of 410
All Units:
1. All units in the proposed development will be installed with suitably sized and
designed air -ducted heating and ventilation system; and will be installed with
central air-conditioning, prior of building/occupancy permit.
2. The installation of central air conditioning systems and a double -glazed window
and building construction meeting the minimum requirements of the Ontario
Building Code (OBC) will provide adequate sound insulation for the proposed
building and will exceed this requirement.
3. When detailed floor plans and building elevations are available for the suites
along the Ottawa Street South, the glazing requirements shall be refined based
on actual window to floor area ratios.
4. The following Noise Warning Clauses will be registered on title through a future
development agreement with the Region of Waterloo and included in all
Agreements of Purchase and Sale/Lease/Rental Agreements (and a
Condominium declaration if applicable):
"Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in
the development and within the building units, sound levels due to increasing road traffic
may on occasions interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound
levels exceed the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the
Environment. "
"This unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow
windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound
levels are within the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of the
Environment."
Further to the above, that prior to the issuance of any building/occupancy permits, the
City of Kitchener's Building Inspector will certify that the noise attenuation measures are
incorporated in the building plans and upon completion of construction, the City of
Kitchener's Building Inspector will certify that the dwelling units have been constructed
accordingly.
Stationary Noise
Regional staff have reviewed the stationary noise aspects of the study entitled
"Environmental Noise Study 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South, Kitchener, Ontario" dated
January 28, 2022, by JPE Engineering and have no objection to the Zoning By-law
Amendment based on the findings of the report.
The study determined that stationary noise sources requiring assessment included 20
HVAC units. The modeled results indicate predicted noise levels for the daytime and
Document Number: 4213078 Version: 1
Page 23 of 410
nighttime periods are below the noise level limits of the MECP NPC -300 noise guideline
for a Class 1 acoustical environment at off-site points of reception. No mitigation is
required to protect off-site receivers.
With respect to impact of on-site noise sources on on-site receptors, the report notes
the individual HVAC units will be located on the balconies of each unit, with each
balcony separated by a wall or balcony wall thus HVAC units being screened
acoustically from neighbouring residential units shall be implemented at the Site Plan
Stage. The report notes that the proposed HVAC units are specifically designed to be
located on the exterior of residential units. It concludes that the HVAC units are
acceptable from a noise perspective and no mitigation is required. Notwithstanding
these conclusions, please be advised that the MECP NPC -216 guidelines apply to
residential units in this case.
In reviewing aerial imagery, there does not appear to be any noise sources of potential
impact from off-site noise sources on on-site sensitive receptors. No further
assessment is required from off-site noise sources. Based on the above, Regional staff
are satisfied with the stationary noise components of the study and no further mitigation
for stationary noise is required.
Water Services
Staff note that the property is serviced by two existing legacy connections to the
Regional 450mm Zone 5 watermain on Ottawa Street South. Typically, services of
Regional watermains are not permitted. However, future Region Transportation Capital
Project 5796 will include the replacement of the 4500mm Regional main with a local
watermain. The project is currently scheduled for 2022-2023. If the proposed
connections for this development occur prior to the local watermain installation, a
temporary connection to the 450mm Regional watermain will be permitted.
Housing Services
The following Regional policies and initiatives support the development and
maintenance of affordable housing:
• Regional Strategic Plan
o Objective 4.2 requires the Region to make affordable housing more available
to individuals and families.
• 10 -Year Housing and Homelessness Plan
o contains an affordable housing target which is that 30% of all new residential
development between 2019 and 2041 in Waterloo Region is to be affordable
to low and moderate income households.
• Building Better Futures Framework
o shows how the Region plans to create 2,500 units of housing affordable to
people with low to moderate incomes by 2025.
• Region of Waterloo Official Plan
Document Number: 4213078 Version: 1
Page 24 of 410
o Section 3.A (range and Mix of Housing) contains land use policies that ensure
the provision of a full and diverse range and mix of permanent housing that is
safe, affordable, of adequate size, and meets the accessibility requirements
of all residents.
The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including
affordable housing. Rent levels and house prices that are considered affordable
according to the ROP are provided below in the section on affordability. Should this
development application move forward, staff recommend that the applicant consider
providing a number of affordable housing units on the site (affordable according to the
ROP definition).
In order for affordable housing to fulfill its purpose of being affordable to those who
require rents or purchase prices lower than the regular market provides, a mechanism
should be in place to ensure the units remain affordable and establish income levels of
the households who can rent or own the homes.
Staff further recommend meeting with Housing Services to discuss the proposal in more
detail and to explore opportunities for partnerships or programs and mechanisms to
support a defined level of affordability.
Affordability
For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of an ownership unit, based on the
definition in the Regional Official Plan, the purchase price is compared to the least
expensive of:
Housing for which the purchase price
results in annual accommodation costs
which do not exceed 30 percent of gross
$385,500
annual household income for low and
moderate income households
Housing for which the purchase price is
at least 10 percent below the average
$576,347
purchase price of a resale unit in the
regional market area
Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2021).
In order for an owned unit to be deemed affordable, the maximum affordable house
price is $385,500.
For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of a rental unit, based on the definition of
affordable housing in the Regional Official Plan, the average rent is compared to the
least expensive of:
Document Number: 4213078 Version: 1
Page 25 of 410
A unit for which the rent does not exceed
30 per cent of the gross annual
$1,470
household income for low and moderate
income renter households
A unit for which the rent is at or below the
Bachelor: $950
average market rent (AMR) in the
1 -Bedroom: $1,134
regional market area
2 -Bedroom: $1,356
3 -Bedroom: $1,538
4+ Bedroom: $3,997
*Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2021)
In order for a rental unit to be deemed affordable, the average rent for the proposed
units which have fewer than 3 bedrooms must be at or below the average market rent in
the regional market area as shown above. For proposed units with three or more
bedrooms, the average rent for the units must be below $1,470.
Please do not hesitate to contact me directly by email at
JlVlaanMjgqgp22regionofwaterloo.ca should you have any questions or wish to
discuss in more detail.
Conclusions:
Regional staff have no objection to Zoning By-law Amendment Application No.
ZBA22/009. Implementation • the accepted noise mitigation •. shall be
through a future Consent or Condominium Application and Site Plan Approval
Application stage.
General Comments and next steps
Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted application will be
subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof.
Further, please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the draft By-law and decision
pertaining to this application. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Yours truly,
C. Agrawal Real Estate Investments (Owner), Patterson Planning Consultants Inc. C/O Scott
Patterson (Applicant)
Document Number: 4213078 Version: 1
Page 26 of 410
GRCA Comments
GRCA has no objection to the approval of Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA22/009/O/ES (1257 &
1265 Ottawa Street SoUth\.
The subject properties do not contain any watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands,
valley slopes or other environmental features of interest to GRCA. The properties are not
subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and therefore we have no comment.
Sincerely,
Jessica
Jessica Conroy, VIES Pl.
Resource Planning Technician
Grand River Conservation Authority
400 Clyde Road, PO Box 729
Cambridge, (]NN1R5VV0
Office: 519-O21-2708ext. 223O
Toll-free: 1-866-900-4722
Email: Lcon royff_g rand river. ca
www, arand river. ca I Connect with us on social media
Page 27Of410
City of Kitchener
Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form
Address: 1257 Ottawa St S
Owner: Agrawal Real Estate Investment Trust & Dotsenko
Application: Zoning By-law Amendment #ZBA22/009/0/ES
Comments Of: Parks and Cemeteries
Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross
Email: Lenore. ross@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7427
❑ 1 plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
X❑ No meeting to be held
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Documents Reviewed:
I have reviewed the documentation noted below submitted in support of a ZBA to permit a 3 -
storey building with 20 residential units. To facilitate this development a ZBA has been requested to
implement RES -5 in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The owner is also requesting that a new site-specific
provision be added to the zoning by-law to allow an increase in Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to 0.63.
1. Reinders + Law Ltd — Architectural Site Plan rev#5 dated 12/05/2021
2. Patterson Planning Consultants Inc - Urban Design Brief dated April 2022
3. Patterson Planning Consultants Inc - Planning Opinion Report dated April 2022
4. Reinders + Law Ltd - Typical Floor Plans dated 2022-01-21
2. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
This site is within the Laurentian Hills Planning Community and although Places and Spaces (June 2022
draft) identifies this site as being within a 500m walkshed of existing local park space, Ottawa St S is a
significant road barrier for short-term park use and this emphasizes the importance of quality on-site
amenity spaces for residents' use. The proposed site plan indicates private patio/balcony areas that
are small and a common amenity area that is 46M2 of concrete pavement.
Prior to Parks and Cemeteries providing support for the Zone Change Application, an improved on-
site amenity space should be shown on a revised site plan and the Urban Design Brief should be
updated to include conceptual amenity area design and precedent images
3. Comments on Submitted Documents
The following comments should be addressed at this time.
1) Reinders + Law Ltd —Architectural Site Plan rev#5 dated 12/05/2021
a) an improved on-site amenity space should be shown on a revised site plan
2) Patterson Planning Consultants Inc -Urban Design Brief dated April 2022
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 1 of 2
Page 28 of 410
City of Kitchener
Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form
a) the Urban Design Brief should be updated to include conceptual amenity area design and
precedent images
4. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy
Asper Section 8I2—Urban Forests ofthe Official Plan ...
o 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 ofudevelopment application.
o 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.
o Please see UDM Part [ Section 13 and for detailed
submission requirements
• City ofKitchener Park|and Dedication Policy
• City ofKitchener Development Manual
w Cycling and Trails Master Plan (2O2O)
• Chapter 69Oofthe current Property Maintenance By-law
• Places and Spaces (June 2O2Zdraft)
• Urban Design Manual
The parkland dedication requirement for this submission is deferred and will be assessed at a future Site
Plan Application. Parkland dedication will be assessed based on the land use class(es) and density
approved through the ZBAand required asacondition nfSite Plan Approval
Park|and dedication is required for the application as cash -in -lieu of land.
Dedication requirements are subject to the Park|and Dedication Policy in effect. Please be advised that
the City of Kitchener Parldand Dedication Policy is currently under review
ACity for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 2of2
Page 29Of410
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment
App|ication:Z8A22/OOQ/O/ES
Project Address: 1257 8' 1365 Ottawa Street South
Comments of: Transportation Senvices
[onomenLer'sName: Dave Seller
Emai|:davese||er@kitohener.ca
Phone: S19-741-22OOext. 7369
a. Transportation Service have no concerns with the proposed Zoning By-law amendment being
proposed for this development.
b. Transportation Services support the 3m x45m driveway visibility triangles.
c Based on the plan submitted with this application, Transportation Services support the proposed
parking rate of 1 parking space per unit, plus 15% visitor parking. This equates to a total of 23
parking spaces, of which, 3 are allocate for visitor and 20 spaces are allocated for tenants. This
vehicle parking rate follows the intent ufzoning by-law 2O19-051.
d. Class A bicycle parking should be provided ata minimum rote of 0.5 spaces per unit. This vvmu|d
equate to 10 bicycle parking spaces, based on the 20 units being proposed. This bicycle parking rate
follows the intent of zoning by-law 2819-051. The bicycle parking can be provided in a separate
accessory building or storage lockers and be easily accessible for all users and bicycle types.
Dave Seller, C.E.T.
Traffic Planning Analyst | Transportation Services | City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7369 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 |
0 0014 V 0 0 0
Page 30 of 410
I have reviewed the submitted package for 1257 and 1265 Ottawa Street and have no concerns about
the proposed design. It would be great if they could relocate the proposed parking space #1 as it is
highly exposed from the street. We can discuss this more in detail during the site plan process.
Senior Urban Designer/ Planning Division / City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7342 / TTY 1-866-969-9994
Page 31 of 410
Good Morning Eric,
The Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) has reviewed the agency circulation for the above -
noted application which proposes to rezone the subject lands to facilitate the development of 20 stacked
townhouses. The WRDSB offers the following comments for information and consideration:
Student Accommodation
At this time, the subject lands are within the boundaries of the following WRDSB schools:
• Forest Hill Public School (Junior Kindergarten toGrade G);
• Laurentian Public School (Grade 7toGrade 8);and
wCameron Heights Collegiate Institute (Grade QtoGrade 12).
The VVRDSB's2020-2030 Long -Term Accommodation Plan provides information on student enrolment
and accommodation atthese schools.
Student Transportation
The VVRD5Bsupports active transportation, and vverequest that pedestrian safetvandconnentivhxbe
considered insite design and through construction ofany development. Student Transportation Services
of Waterloo Region (STSWR)'s school buses will not travel privately owned or maintained right-of-ways to
pick up/drop off students. Transported students may be required to meet the bus at a congregated bus
pick-up point and STSWR may have additional comments about student pick-up point(s) placement on
municipal right-of-ways.
Education Development Charges
Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to theWRDS13's Education
Development Cha[�B -�Iqw 2021, asamended orany successor thereof and may require the payment
of Education Development Charges prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Should you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
Christie
Christie Kent MopRPP
Senior Planner
Waterloo Region District School Board
51Arde|tAvenue, Kitchener ON, N2C2R5
T:51Q-57O-O003Ext. 445Q
Page 32 of 410
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
B) That the developer shall include the following wording in the site plan agreement to advise all
purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same:
"In order to limit liability, public school buses operated bythe Student Transportation
Services of Waterloo Region (STSWR), or its assigns or successors, will not travel on
privately owned or maintained right-of-ways to pick up students, and potential busing
students will be required to meet the bus at a congregated bus pick-up point.'
C) That the developer enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be registered on the
title tothe Property that provides:
"All agreement ofpurchase and sole orleases for the sale orlease ofo completed home
or a home to be completed on the Property must contain the wording set out below to
advise a// purchasers of residential units ondlor renters of same."
"In order to limit liability, public school buses operated bvthe Student Transportation
Services ofWaterloo Region (STIN/8),mrits assigns orsuccessors, will not travel on
privately owned or maintained right-of-ways to pick up students, and potential busing
students will berequired tomeet the bus otmcongregated bus pick-up point. "
If you require any further information, please contact me by e-mail at Jordan. Neaje@wcclsb.ca.
Thank you,
Jordan Neale
Planning Technician, VVCDS8
4DODutton Dr, Waterloo, ()NN2L4C6
519-S78'366Oext. 23G5
Page 33 of 410
City of Kitchener - Comment Form
Project Address: 1257 & 1265 Ottawa Street S
Application Type: OPA and ZBA
Comments of: Environmental Planning (Sustainability) — City of Kitchener
Commenter's name: Gaurang Khandelwal
Email: gaurang.khandelwal@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7611
Written Comments Due: June 27, 2022
Date of comments: June 27, 2022
1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application:
• Sustainability Statement, 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South, prepared by Patterson Planning
Consultants Inc.
Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support a Zoning By-law Amendment to redevelop
the subject lands by demolishing the existing two single detached dwellings on site and replacing them
with a 3 -storey building with 20 residential units, regarding sustainability and energy conservation and
provided the following:
• Based on my review of the supporting documentation, the proposed development is generally in
compliance with the Ontario Building Code (OBC).
• Although the Ontario Building Code (OBC) is advanced, going forward all developments will need
to include robust energy conservation measures as the City (and Region of Waterloo) strive to
achieve our greenhouse gas reduction target.
• It is recommended that more progressive measures that go beyond the OBC be explored to
further energy conservation, generation, operation and benefit future residents/tenants.
An updated Sustainability Statement incorporating a more progressive energy conservation and
efficient design is required to support the Zoning Bylaw Amendment.
The applicant should further clarify:
o Why the cost of implementing alternative water supply and demand management
systems as well as alternative energy systems is not feasible for a project of this scale
o If the development be able to add/incorporate alternative water supply and demand
management, and alternative energy systems in the future
o If the building will be engineered to add solar PVs if required
1IPage
Page 34 of 410
u If the development will utilize low -flow plumbing fixtures to reduce water demand
o If the units will be separately metered to allow for more efficient management of
energy use onatenant-bv-tenan1basis
o If LED lighting will be utilized for indoor and outdoor lighting and if sensors will be used
toincrease energy efficiency
o If the roof will have white/light colored material to reduce heat island effects and
reduce cooling requirements
o If the building/units minimize air pollutants in interior materials by using low or no VOC
paints and finishes
o If the development will have provision of community/common gardens and/or urban
agriculture with on-site composting for future residents
�
A Sustainability Statement (as per the City's Terms of Reference) will be required as part of a
complete Site Plan Application which can further explore and/or confirm additional
sustainability measures that are best suited tnthe development.
3. Policies, Standards and Resources:
w Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7C.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.[6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy
consumption.
w Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7I.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 7I.6.8. Development applications will be required to demonstrate,
to the satisfaction of the City, energy is being conserved or low energy generated.
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7I.627. 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.
4.
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://vvww.sustainab|evvater|ooregionza/nur-programs/re8iona|-sustainabi|ity-
initiative andTrave|VVise ht1p://vvvvvvsustainab|evva1edooregion.oa/our-programs/trave|vvise).
The can be found on the City's website under
'Planning Resources' at ...
2|Pa�e
Page 35 of 410
Building; no concerns
Mike Seiling
Building Division
519.741.2200 Ext. 7669
Page 36 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Colleen Stewart
Sent Sunday, November 2(\2O2210:4SAM
To: Eric Schneider; Paul Singh;
Subject: Meeting Re: 1257 and 1256 Ottawa Street S. Proposed Development
You don't often get email from, �a
Dear Mr. Schneider, Mr. Singh, and Mr. Patterson:
I am writing to you all to express my utter disappointment in the Neighbourhood Meeting that was conducted for
residents surrounding the proposed development.
This meeting was so poorly executed, and I am wholeheartedly against this proposed new development in my
neighbourhood,
I implore you to take a few moments and read my letter in its entirety as I am entitled to express my feedback.
Firstly, the method you chose tmpresent the meeting is100%exclusionary and discriminatory. The vast majority of
residents that were invited to participate are seniors, most do not have internetorthe capacity to attend a zoom
meeting. Most have been out of the workforce for 15 years plus, and have never even heard of a zoom meeting. This,|
feel, was intentional.There are currently NO Covid restrictions, and no reason whatsoever to have not had an in-person
meeting. I'm sure all of you are attending in person meetings now, and you could have organized one for
these residents. To that point, if someone had special needs or accomoclations at a regular meeting, you would have
been obliged to offer them provisions to be able to attend and participate i ' n the meeting. |nfact, children are given
computers in school in order to be able to participate in online classes so that no one is left out. Yet you sent out card
detailing a meeting to citizens that do not have the required devices, technology, nor the knowledge on how to
participate actively and fully. We are still dealing with residents using |and|ines.
Unless they had internet capability, and then a computer, and THEN someone to show them how to use Zoom, they
could not ask questions, express their opinions, or participate fully. This was so aQeis1 and left the majority ofresidents
upset, and feeling like they were not being respected or heard. Not only could telephone participants not ask questions
or add comments, they were helpless and couldn't do anything but listen toyour script.
Secondly, the presenters spoke very quickly and using terminology completely foreign to the residentshere. |wms
typing in questions on behalf of my partner, Brian Chivers, as he was asking them, and the message kept coming up that
the question has been answered, the question has been answered .... well I ask You, what good is an answer if nobody
understands it? Again, I feel as though you were simply disregarding and pandering to your coworkers rather than
engaging inmeaningful dialogue. Quoting bylaws, or dismissing people's genuine concerns with a "most of you already
have trees in your backyard, so..." comment is not only dismissive rhetoric, but rude. You reminded Brian to"be
respectful ...... but | would say that sitting safely behind a computer screen using pre -determined answers and big fancy
words was the utmost ofbeing disrespectful. Unless none ofyou have ever had grandparents oraging parent, you know
full well that you 100% did not do your job, nor did you acknowledge genuine questions with genuine answers. No
compassion. No understanding.
On the subject of being "disrespectful", I was still raising my hand when it was said, "if there are no more questions,
we'll finish ithnre" I raised it three times as I wanted to participate as well, but as Brian had been deemed to be
"disrespectful", his name was no longer called. | am still in the workforce, and so | understand that the definition of
:disrespectful" has definitely evolved, but do you think that people in their late 70's understand your new
definition? Being upset, and being passionate, and the way the older generation expresses themselves cannot be held
to newly developing workplace etiquette as they have never experienced this. | felt that, knowing Brian as|do, that he
was extremely restrained and had legitimate questions. But, that isn;teven onthe record for your coworkers to
hear. They will have togobyatranscript ofwhat was said. So, ofthe four people that were actually able togive their
Page 37 of 410
comments, you did not respect and stopped acknowledging one of them because why, he doesn't like your proposal? Or
are you so politically correct that you only acknowledge people who understand the NEW RULES?
Also speaking of disrespect, our elected City Councillor couldn't even grace us with his presence. Our so-called
representation didn't even show up. Yet you proceeded with the meeting even though OUR representative wasn't
there. Shame on you, Paul Singh ... you were happy to get our votes but where were you when your duty to us was called
upon?
Thirdly, you are proposing building this on the perimeter of the most expensive homes in this very well established
neighbourhood. The question was asked, would you do this in other expensive neighbourhoods, or are our home values
not as "valuable"? Is our privacy, tranquility, neighbourhood sense of community less valuable? Not to the residents
who have lived here for 20, 25, 30 plus years. Most unfortunately, I totally expect that your "arborist" will allow you to
rip down the mature trees that would make even the thought of this more palatable with some excuse that meets your
agenda because building around them will be somewhat more challenging. You say you will "landscape" the property,
but I'm sure you won't plant quick growing trees (or replace the ones removed with mature trees at a greater expense)
that will produce lots of leaves because then your clean up and maintenance costs will be higher. Any landscaping will
be for the potential residents and maybe to hide the garbage receptacle that you want to place right at the back of OUR
properties. How considerate. Your residents won;t have to smell their refuse, but instead of smelling my lilacs and long
cultivated roses, I will get to smell their refuse.Your entire proposal reeks of a money grab with no regard or concern for
us, the people who have MADE this neighbourhood.
My fourth and final point, you did not address the effect that the additional lighting, headlights, balconies facing directly
into our yard with no significant fencing or tree line, noise of twenty additional residents or multiple residents will do to
the feeling of our neighbourhood. We don't close the blinds at night - we have never had a need. But now, at any given
time, we may have several people looking straight at us and into our home. Our HOME. A six foot fence? Will that fence
shield us from the balconies? That makes no sense whatsoever. Ask any of your engineers and planners if they can
explain that to us.
You are speaking of adding a minimum of 20 but potentially a hundred new residents. We are happy to include new
people in the neighbourhood - we have welcomed so many new neighbours over the years. But in an area that consists
of single family dwellings, this just isn;t the location to build this dwelling.
I will be forwarding this letter to the Mayor of Kitchener, every City Councillor, and as a courtesy to my neighbours that
DO NOT even have internet, I will be printing it and distributing it to them as well. I encourage ALL residents to write to
you or call you.
Regards,
Colleen Stewart and Brian Chivers
Kitchener, ON
Page 38 of 410
From: CadnsBazzaeUa
Sent: Tuesday, November 15,2O22318PK4
To: Eric Schneider
Cc Paul Singh
Subject: Neighbourhood Meeting Comments for Zoning By -Law Amendment ZBA22/009/0/ES
Attachments: NeighbourhoodK4eeting.pdf
Ynudon'toftengetemai|frnn-
Learn Why this is� importzknt
Hi Eric,
Please include these cormients in the public record.
Carlos
1
Page 39 of 410
November 14/2022,
Response to Neighbourhood Meeting for the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment number
ZBA22/009/0/ES for the properties located at 1257 & 1265 Ottawa St. S. Kitchener.
This meeting was held online/phone-call Nov 8 @ 7pm and lasted just over an hour. The sign in front
of the properties at issue were updated with the meeting information less than 7 days before the
meeting. We were told that our representative, Paul Sign, would be present in the meeting but he did
not attend.
The vast majority of people on our street, Nine Pines Rd., are old and do not have internet so their only
way to contribute to the meeting was to do a phone -call. The problem is that only people online could
ask questions via chat so that silenced a bunch of unhappy neighbours that called in. Furthermore when
it came time for live dialog, where the phone -call people could interact if they were still on the line,
this feedback was not recorded, so basically this guaranteed phone -people had no voice in this process.
The very few people that were able to get online, 4 from what I could tell, asked many questions but
instead of reading the questions verbatim, the questions were real-time paragraphed by the host to be
completely different than the intended questions and the chat setup did not provide a way to correct the
questions so they could be answered properly. It was as if, a list of questions and answers were
previously fielded and the host would just pick from that list the closest match and use them.
All of the previously submitted concerns and issues with the current proposal were categorically
dismissed with excuses that we wish to contest. Instead of providing us with detailed assessments with
a clearly labelled expert in the field, we were just provided a few seconds of dismissal. I will go into
details of some of those later but the pattern I saw was that nothing actionable or anything real was
offered to alleviate our concerns.
Concerns
(1) Placement of multi -dwelling building on a block with the most expensive houses in the
neighbourhood
Nine Pines rd contains 26 high-end houses on large lots. Most are 2 floors high with 2 car garages and
long driveways. There is no sidewalks. Our very own Paul Sign has provided multiple properties on
this street with awards for the best properties in the neighbour. Putting a multi -dwelling building on this
block would be equivalent to putting one on Deer Ridge, Hidden Valley or Mannheim.
Your response was basically that the area/location doesn't matter, that you would just as well field this
proposal if it was in Deer Ridge, Hidden Valley or Mannheim. We highly doubt that anybody would put
a multi -dwelling building in any of those neighbourhoods because it is not compatible with adjacent
uses of land.
Page 40 of 410
(2) Property value destruction
The concern with how this proposal would affect our property values was dismissed with basically
saying that property values fluctuate so they don't really care about it. The dismissal basically said, we
don't know we don't care. Problem is that if you ask any Real Estate agent how to increase the value of
your property, in under a second you will hear upgrade your kitchen. Likewise it doesn't take a genius
to figure out that if your quiet, isolated and nature -like backyard is now adjacent to an over -crowded
parking lot that your property value will go down because it becomes a lot less appealing than before.
What we want is acknowledgement of the obvious.
(3) Traffic volume/car safety
The Fischer -Hallman and Ottawa corner is one of the most dangerous intersections in the city. The
addition of 23 cars into the mix was dismissed as irrelevant given the high volume of cars already there
(10,000). This excuse makes no sense. Our issue is not with increasing the volume from 10,000 to
10,023, the issue is with the safety risk caused by these new 23 cars coming in and out of that 10,000
car volume. Since the proposal calls for a 1 lane into/out of property. What would happen if a car is
coming in while there is a car already there trying to get out? How is that situation compounded with
23 cars? This 1 lane to accommodate 23 cars in and out at rush hour is inadequate.
What we want is to see a real study done instead of just dismissal. Maybe a traffic light on Valleyview
Rd would make it safer to get in and out of property and avoid accidents.
(4) Backyard privacX
Brian mentioned how this proposed building will affect his privacy and backyard enjoyment just to be
dismissed with a comment about how they could build a new house with the current zoning with a
second floor balcony and it would be the same privacy invasion as the proposed building. This is not
correct because with current zoning, 2 floors house and 6 feet fence provides more privacy than 3 floor,
1OX more eyes and 6 feet fence.
What we want is an equivalently higher fence that can provide the same level of privacy.
(5) Garbage smell
It was mentioned that the garbage of the 20 units would stink and affect adjacent backyards specially
considering their proposed location in the back of their combined lot. This concern was dismissed by
describing their stink -free in -ground garbage silos.
What we want is that the in -ground garbage silos be placed as close to the street and the building front
entrance as possible so that residents and people passing by can experience this amazing technological
wonder of the world.
Page 41 of 410
(6) Others: tree removal/pollution/noise/lights
Brian mentioned that the lights and noise of 23 cars will affect his property and keep him up all hours
of the night. Nothing was offered as a solution to this problem. Also removing all trees will increase the
noise in our backyards because the leafs in the trees block/reflect sound. Replacing all vegetation with
a parking lot will most certainly increase the risk of flooding our backyards in case their proposed
draining system gets clogged.
What we want is a report with real numbers about how removing these old and large 26 trees and
replacing it with 23 cars affects CO2 emissions and air quality in our backyards. We want these CO2
emissions as far away from our backyards as possible and be placed in front of their building just like
we currently have with every house in this block.
Sincerely,
Carlos Bazzarella
Page 42 of 410
You don't often get email fron-
HiEhc/Tom,
-
Monday, November 14'20227:39PK4
Eric Schneider
Concerns regarding 1257 & 1265 Ottawa St. S. Kitchener.
Thanks for info session about this project. However, after having reviewed the supporting documents aswell as
listening to the developer's presentation, | personally don't think it is a very good fit given the topographics of this
neighborhood.
Zoning change
I'm sure when the city did a review for new zoning change proposals, many factors must have been considered. |just
don't see how it is appropriate to change a RES2 to a RES5 zoning since it is a huge stepup. My understanding is the
developer decided to pursue a Res5 because their proposed building would fit best in a res5 community. Thus, I'm not
sure how vveshould step upoomuch just because ofone building.
Parking
4ayou know, the developer isproposing 1parking spot per unit. Unfortunately, the reality ofthe matter ismost
household have Zcars. You can already see all the overflow on Williamsburg Rd and nine pines every night from the
other housing complex. How does the city intend to address this situation? Especially in the winter?
Park and rec space
There is not enough parks and green spaces for the current residence to use currently. With anextra Z0households, is
the city going to provide additional park and rec areas to support this building? Is there any sort of integration into the
current park system that isinplace?
Traffic/transit
So due to the lack of transit options and not in the MTSA at Ottawa and Fischer Hallmann, is the city planning to increase
bus routes, LTR extensions in the near future to satisfy the reduced parking a1this site? With the reduced parking, is it
assumed that there will beextra uber/de|iverytraffic aswell. With asingle entry road insuch close proximity hoFischer
Hallmann, how is this going to be addressed? I know from first hand during the rush hour that it is almost impossible to
exit onto Ottawa stespecially the past summer due tnconstruction. Will there beamedian built toavoid traffic coming
out mfthis site tohead westbound for better traffic flow?
Noise/privacy
I'm sure many ofmyneighbours have already brought upthis concern. Even the fact that the building isactua|kt31/2
stories having the basement 1/2 above ground, the balconies will definitely be very invasive for the surrounding
neighbours without all the large trees as o buffer. A 6ftfence will definitely not provide enough privacy in any way.
Garbage collection
Given that 20 units will definitely require private collection, is there a plan for garbage to be collected a few times a
week or what is the promise that the developer intend to deal with this issue. There isadecent amount nfwildlife in
this area, so this could turn into a very big issue.
Page 43 of 410
Is there a way to save more of these old trees that have grown for over 30-40 years? What are they willing to do to
compensate for this? Are they planting new trees in the neighborhood?
City comments
I believe that I saw there has been no city comments on this project. When can we expect to see whether you or the
city intend to recommend this project or not?
I think in my opinion, a drastic zone change as such is a bit hard for me to accept. I can see a res 2 to res 3, but this is a
huge leap! Again, I understand that the developer is asking for this because this suits their building needs, but I don't
think this is the right path for this neighborhood. Thanks for your time and I hope you will have an opportunity to
address my concerns.
Thanks,
Rock
Sent from my Galaxy
Page 44 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Michael Brisson
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 8:28 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: 1257 Ottawa St. S. - Neighbourhood Meeting
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Hi Eric,
I missed the meeting.
Is it available for viewing ? Please send a link if available.
Thanks
Michael
Sent from my iPad
Page 45 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Adam Herfst
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2022 12:04 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: 1257 & 1265 Ottawa Street South
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Hi Eric,
I would like to comment that this shift to higher density residential buildings on Ottawa street is a fantastic idea. We
should not have expensive and larger -footprint single dwellings on Ottawa street, it is too busy of a street.
Now, what would be great is if these higher -density buildings on being built on Ottawa street would be to increase
walkability and bike -ability in this area as current infrastructure is horribly inadequate for safe and convenient usage.
Pedestrians and bicyclists should be much more separated from busy streets where people are driving 70 km/h, such as
that stretch of Ottawa street.
Thanks,
Adam Herfst
Student - ARIDO
School of Engineering & Information Technology I CONESTOGA COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY & ADVANCED LEARNING
Conestoga Official Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and may be
privileged or confidential. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone else is prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete this email and attachments.
Page 46 of 410
From: D. Grant
Sent Thursday, June 3O,20227:13PK4
To: Eric Schneider; Paul Singh; scott@pp|anzom
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1257 & 1265 Ottawa St S
Dear Sirs,
I am just responding to your plan for development on Ottawa St S.
|amstrongly against this plan. After having lived onVaUeyvewRdfor almost 2Oyears, | have seen Such anincrease in
traffic in this area, which has made accessing Ottawa St (especially when making a left hand turn from Valleyview onto
Ottawa) increasingly difficult and dangerous. And the intersection ofOttawa and Fischer -Hallman has also become
increasingly busy and dangerous for cars and pedestrians.
Adding more traffic, which would be as a result of the proposed development, isn't wise and would only increase
congestion and the propensity for accidents.
Unfortunately I don't feel my concerns will be taken into consideration.
Thank you for listening,
Donna Grant
Page 47 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Rhonda Reist
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 5:16 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Rhonda Reist - Work
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1257 and 1265 Ottawa Street
I am just responding to your plan for development on Ottawa St S.
I am strongly against this plan. After having lived on Valleyview Rd for almost 20 years, I have seen such an increase in
traffic in this area, which has made accessing Ottawa St (especially when making a left hand turn from'SEP'Valleyview onto
Ottawa) increasingly difficult and dangerous. And the intersection of Ottawa and Fischer -Hallman has also become
increasingly busy and dangerous for cars and pedestrians.
Adding more traffic, which would be as a result of the proposed development, isn't wise and would only increase
congestion and the propensity for accidents.
Thank you for your serious consideration of these concerns.
Rhonda
Sent from my Phone
Page 48 of 410
Eric Schneider
From:
DENNIS STECKLY
Sent:
Thursday, June 30, 2022 4:18 PM
To:
Eric Schneider
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Concerns regarding application for development, Ottawa St S
Hello,
My name is Anita Moreau-Steckly and I am a resident of Nine Pines Rd in Kitchener. My husband and I recently returned
from our vacation and became aware of a planned development project at 1257 & 1265 Ottawa Street S where two
residential homes are intended to be demolished and converted into a multi-level apartment complex and adjacent
parking lot. I wish to express some concerns that I and my neighbours share about this planned development project.
My neighbours and I are concerned that this rezoning and development project will negatively impact life on our adjoining
street as well as the value of our own properties. Many of the homes on our street are upwards of 50 years old; at the time
of their construction, they were located on the edge of town and none of the occupants would have imagined a scenario
where they might find themselves adjacent to an apartment complex of this nature. Though times may change, many of
the residents of this neighborhood are still primarily families in single dwelling homes. Some of our neighbours whose
yards border on this proposed project will lose the majority of their backyard privacy as well as the shade provided by the
many mature trees that would need to be cut down. We worry that changing the zoning in our area would open up the
possibility of similar developments being proposed in other nearby lots in the event of other houses being listed on the
market. Many of these projects are proposed by people who neither live in our area, nor intend to live here. Why then
would they be concerned how their income properties negatively impact the existing neighbourhood, so long as it
continues to be profitable for them? We already have plenty of issues with out-of-town property owners on our streets and
their renters not maintaining their houses and lawns.
Ours is not a large street and we already have issues with occupants of the townhouses on Williamsburg parking in front
of our houses at all times of the day. We are concerned that the residents of the proposed apartment complex with
multiple vehicles will choose to park any extra vehicles that they or their guests might own in front of our homes due to the
lack of available parking on Ottawa Street. In addition to more cars, we worry that the 23+ new residents will also bring
more garbage and noise pollution with them. Essentially, the number of neighbours that adjoin our street will increase 10 -
fold even though the physical space will remain the same. None of us signed up for that when we bought our homes many
decades ago.
We respectfully ask that the city will take our concerns into consideration while looking into this matter.
Sincerely,
-The Steckly family
Page 49 of 410
Eric Schneider
From:
Nathalee F.
Sent:
Thursday, June 30, 2022 11:19 AM
To:
Eric Schneider
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Questions Re: Notice of Development in my Neighborhood
Good morning Eric,
I am writing in response to a communication I received in the mail about a pending development at 1257 & 1265 Ottawa
Street South in Kitchener.
Please see my questions and comments below:
I. How long is this project expected to take for completion?
2. What are the anticipated impacts/ risks to residents?
3. What steps does the applicant intend to take to mitigate any risks/ impacts to residents?
4. Where will trucks and workers' vehicles be parked? This is of particular interest to me as we have limited parking in
this area and a number of residents currently park on the street eg. on Williamsburg Road. Displacing us would not be
fair and so it would be best if alternate arrangements be made for staff and trucks in order to ensure that residents are
not inconvenienced.
5. In terms of long term parking for residents of this new development, how practical is it to have 20 units and only 23
parking spaces? Is this something that has been thought of? Is the intention that the residents (particularly those with
multiple vehicles) and their visitors are to park on the road as well? This will no doubt create a strain on the already
tricky situation of parking in this area. To make matters worse, given that between December 1 - March 31 of each year,
the roadway cannot be used for overnight parking, where will residents of this development with more than one vehicle
be expected to park?
Looking gorward to answers at the earliest possible time.
Thanks,
Nathalee Ferguson
Page 50 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Stacy Bambrick >
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 12:09 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for Developement 1257-1265 Ottawa St S
Attachments: Land Survey 1255 Ottawa St S.pdf, Questions - City of Kitchener Rezoning.pdf
Hello Mr. Schneider,
Thank you for the opportunity for the residents in the area of 1257-1265 that would be affected by the redevelopment
of those properties to submit our questions and concerns.
I am the proud owner
I've reviewed the documentation provided on the City's website and
formulated my questions or concerns in a document for your review. Please find attached, along with the only copy of
the land survey (noted in the questions document).
I kindly ask you to confirm receipt of this email as being on time (barely) for the submission date of June 30th.
I look forward to hearing back from you regarding next steps or answering any concerns/questions in the document.
I'm available by reply to this email or directly at
Warmly,
Stacy
Have a wonderful long weekend and happy Canada Day!
Page 51 of 410
Per the rendering (page 8):
o There are three trees that are shown that would be planted separating the driveways,
close tothe sidewalk. My concerns:
�
The type oftrees -wiUtheygrowiobeesignificant size?
• Root systems can affect mydriveway
• Root systems can affect the sewer lines running from myhome (it runs
down the center ofthe two semis inparallel
• Visibility from my driveway
n Tbsee pedestrians coming from the left (Fisher Hallman vvay)'
conversely ifleaving the new driveway, itreduces visibility tothe
right (towards VVeetnnounU
» For pedestrians seeing anyone leaving rnydriveway
» Tbsee traffic coming from the left (Fisher Hallman) Onthe
roadway, you have [obeonthe sidewalk/apron ofthe driveway
before you can see oncoming traffic. Conversely for people
leaving the new address and seeing traffic approaching from the
right (from Westmount)
o There ks@tree depicted onthe drawing atthe end ofmydriveway as itwould enter into
my backyard. That tree does not exist, nor will it, as it would impede my access to my
backyard.
w Why would that tree be on the rendering? As an argument for dulling noise or
light? Providing privacy?
�
Its an erroneous tree that | vvnu|d not plant there and offers no benefit to
either side
1 ^==�==m
Page 52 of 410
There are 3walnut trees close tothe property line, currently onmyside ofthe fence at
the back of the property. One in particular overhangs onto the 1257 property, Given the
proposal is to have o parking lot back there, |'nn assuming those trees will be regularly
trimmed. This nnoYresult inoioni�oant|vinnn�/tnf+hnhen|+h^f+h�fn=�c
' �~—__-'—�,__---._..~..~..~'
m Would there bearequest for those trees to be removed entirely?
im Currently onthe rendering itdoesn't show the trees ormyshed onmyproperty
there. They would overhang the yellow boxed out area on the rendering
You can see from the aria] view a bit better that
n
What will the impact onmyproperty befor the removal ofthe large trees on the
property of1257.
rm Damages to the driveway? (roots? - there have already been roots identified in
my sewer line by the City of Kitchener suspecting it is from that large front
tree ... which means the roots run Linder my driveway)
m Access tomydriveway while the front tree iSbeing removed?
mi They provide quite a bit of shade which I anticipate will affect the west sunlight
exposure tonnygrass and house (increase inhoating/000|ing)
The rendering depicts a flat grade to the property, this is not truly representative of the
actual grade. The house 8t1257sits lower than the houses oneither side.
m There iSogood 2.5-3ftdifference between the back end ofmydriveway and
the back corner of the house at 1257.
Will this be leveed out? If not, will there be a retaining vvuU installed?
What will the impact beifthe grading changes towater flow/pooling on
nnyproperty. Currently | have nowater issues innnybackyard or
property aeowhole.
» Per Figure 4 in the Opinion report, iLshows that 1265 is higher
than 1257and potentially actually higher than myproperty.
Page 53 of 410
Showing that Uslopes down from Fisher Hallman towards
�
Figure 4: 1257-1265 Ottawa Street South (GoGgle)
What hmthe height ofthe fence between the properties?
o Will itprovide privacy when sitting innnybackyard?
o Will it indeed be a more solid type structure, as shown, to reduce car lights flashing
into myproperty (there isaside window along that new driveway)
o How far forward does the fence go - will it impede visibility on entry/exit of my driveway
o Was there a survey done on the property recently for proper allocation of the new
fence. The only survey I have per the City of Kitchener is potentially the original (see
attached).
o The priorowner of 1257 indicated the fence was hers, but |'d like to know exactly
where the new fence will be located to see the land impaot, if any, on my property. /
have gardens pretty much the length of the fence from the end of the driveway to the
back ofthe property.
m What happens ifany ofthe gardens are affected when the new fence ie
• Plants replaced?
• Trees 8tthe back ofthe property (earlier mentioned) that are close to
the property line and may affect poathO|mplacement?
�
Lighting - What type of lighting will be installed around the property? There is a window along
my driveway for my basement and a large back bedroom window that would mostly be
affected bynight lighting nfthe parking lot and cars coming and going?
o Dothey project dovvnsoit'snotdiffuse|ighdng?
» Will it be the same type of lighting at the side of the building that would/could shine into
the side window?
o The rendering doesn't show any lighting along the back of the parking lot. The only
"backyard" light is off the sidewalk, which I'm not sure wouldn't be adequate lighting for
the space and as such is not a true depiction of what lighting will actually be installed
Will there be no idling signs posted for the parking spaces directly beside the fence?
o As mentioned above, there is e side window aSwell as u side entry door directly
adjacent where the cars would b8parked.
im Currently wecan't easily park that far back inthe driveway and therefore e
Carbon Monoxide concern has not been 8nissue osthat isnot where the
Page 54 of 410
current neighboring driveway is situated.
Questions regarding the type ofrental property:
o Will these beowned units (units for single purchase) or1OUY6rental?
• If rental:
m |SdLow Income housing?
is What is the demographic they are building for?
�
Currently the housing situation inthose two homes ielikely fairly low
(room rentals)
* Will there beoproperty management organization on-aite?
* Will vvebenotified ofwho toreach out tnshould there be8nissue otthe
property?
�
Traffic study -| don't see itbeing listed, was one done?
n It currently iSalready a high volume and high speed traffic area with the residents
leaving VoUeyvievv Dc8heiron|y wxiA, which will bedirectly adjacent tothe new
driveway proposal. |fwe're all trying leave now, it's congested, nevermind adding in
22+new vehicles.
» With City/Regional cons1nuohon(wdhiuhe8emotohovebeenongoingf8ryeGnA'nngink/
at Fisher Hallman and Ottawa it backs up the traffic significantly, and further impedes
visibility and safety for coming and going from the driveways directly across from
Valleyview Dr. and the residents of Valleyview Dr. There is already a significant amount
ofhonking aa@result oftraffic back ups and lack ofcourtesy.
n There is a daycare that is located on the corner of Fisher Hallman and Ottawa, which
can be impacted by the increased traffic in the immediate area. Along with access to
the Church facing Fisher Hallman that entre from Ottawa SL.
» There are currently 22 parking spots depicted on the rendering (page 5). Currently
there is about half of that volume of cars that are currently leaving these three
properties. Which doubles the volume, not including visitors ordeliveries tothe new
property.
» This is also a potential concern for emergency vehicles response time that are
traveling Ot1evvg Sttowards the nna|| and/or expressway. Currently it's already o main
line for emergency vehicles. Does the Current emergency infrastructure include the
intensification 0fthis nature inthe area.
o Is there or would there be consideration to have a traffic light installed at WillamsbUrg
Dr./Daisy Mart to break LIP the volume and potentially provide easier access coming
and going from the properties along that strip?
»
Noise Study - I did not read anything about the increased noise conditions created for the
direct residents on either side of the new building and backing on from Nine Pines. The
reports attached are concerning the noise impacts for the new residents of the building. This
Page 55 of 410
building will bring with it increased noise for all adjoining neighbors. This will affect the
enjoyment of my property (both with noise and privacy)
o The increase in traffic
o The increase of HVAC Units running
o Garbage and Recycling trucks
o Delivery vehicles, in particular those that have back up alarms
o Increase population
o Car alarms & people excessively engaging their power -locking doors resulting in car
honks
• Garbage and Recycling Receptacles
o Where will they be located? I don't see them in the rendering. They may appear near
the far back left corner of the property, but I believe that was noted as a truck turn
around area.
o What types - metal bins or Moloks?
o What would the expected pick-up schedule be (frequency). Is there a mandate?
o Will they be enclosed? Many apartment buildings have over flowing receptacles, in
particular around the end/first of the month when there is tenant turnover
o Who is responsible for pest control if there are increased critters attracted to
overflowing receptacles?
• Infrastructures
o Will there be any infrastructure improvements to support the additional residents?
■ Water/Sewer
■ Internet- the Bell lines are currently horrible and are forced to use Rogers'
infrastructures, which are insufficient at times as it is.
• Questions regarding direct impact on my property:
o What is the perceived impact on Property taxes when there is a rezoning done in the
area?
o What is the direct impact on the property values when an apartment goes up in a
residential line of housing?
o What happens if there are damages done to my property during the excavation and
building of the new establishment? As a result of heavy equipment. In particular my
driveway given the close proximity of the new driveway being installed
o What would the plan for snow removal be as the boulevards along there are not very
wide and with both driveway entries so close, I don't want snow being plowed into the
end of my driveway
• General Questions
o What is the projected timeline for the project completion from start to finish?
o When is this project projected to commence?
o Who is the contractor overseeing the project
o Who is the overall project group/developer
o What interruptions can I expect to my property as infrastructures are developed on the
property
is Water shut offs
■ Gas shut offs (my gas line is on that side of the house running down my
driveway
o What are the hours of operations for the construction?
o Will there be a sewer flush during at the end of the construction for clearing all the
debris that comes along with construction
Page 56 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Greg Macedo >
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 11:26 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Paul Singh
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application For Development - 1257 & 1265 Ottawa St., S. Kitchener,
Ontario
Good day,
We have been residing on Nine Pines Rd. for the past 25 years and chose this location for its
residential appeal.
Having received this notice for development, we feel it will adversely affect our neighbourhood.
This proposal will bring negative changes that will eliminate the mature trees currently enhancing our
environment in this area and may increase the risk of storm water issues.
We do not support having an area behind us with 23 parking spots contributing to fumes, noise, and
overall less peacefulness, and the thought of garbage disposal for 20 units.
Why is the City of Kitchener considering disturbing this pleasing residential area while there has been
a vacant lot on the corner of Ottawa St., S. and Williamsburg Rd. for decades?
It would seem more appropriate to focus on this corner lot for development, than leaving it as it is
presently.
We would appreciate notice of any scheduled neighbourhood meetings.
Regards,
Greg and Karen Macedo
Page 57 of 410
June 12/2022,
Pcbdoo against proposed Zoning By-law Amendment number for the properties
located at 1257 & 1265 Ottawa St. S. Kitchener.
As the satellite picture below illustrates, replacing the 2houses in the white rectangle with a23car
parking lot and a multiple dwelling 2Ounit building will significantly affect all the properties around
it. It can be seen from the picture below that everyone in this block has a quiet and peaceful. backyard
that will be negatively impacted by this. Property values will go down and lots of people will consider
moving away from the area.
Notice the large number of mature trees that will be destroyed. The 2 properties contain 7 of the oldest
and tallest trees in the neighbourhood. There is no way to relocate them. The area will be converted
from a green heaven to an asphalt hell and in the process expose quiet backyards to the noise and air
pollution of 23 automobiles and the garbage of 20 units. Garbage smells and it is not a coincidence that
their plan puts their garbage as far away from their building as possible. This lO}{increase io garbage,
noise and air pollution will affect adjacent properties. Nobody bought a property in this block ever
expecting such destruction to happen. Not only destruction in nature but also destruction in property
value.
Another issue is that all of our backyards are located in a flood plain. When it rains a lot our backyards
get flooded for ofew days. Check the engineering drawing for the house a152Nine Pines Rd. and you
will see it required a double stacked foundation. Replacing the current 2 houses with a parking lot will
send more rain water to our backyards instead of being absorbed by the land.
The zoning are too radical (going from BE3-2 to RES -5 and increasing Floor Space Ratio).
Nine Pines Rd. contains a set of the largest and most expensive houses (single detached residential
dwellings) in the neighbourhood. The block contains 26lots where 20are RES -2 (77Y6)' 4are IlES-4
Page 58 of 410
vast majority of lots in the block are RES -2, it makes no sense to allow such large jump in zoning to the
detriment of surrounding property owners.
There is also a safety issue due to the proximity of this to one of the busiest and most dangerous
intersections in KW area. This property islocated only l35mfrom the Fischer -Hallman Rd8Ottawa
5t. S. intersection where a large flow of cars makes it unsafe for current vehicles to enter 8c exit their
Ottawa St. properties. This danger will be compounded if another 23 cars are added to the mix. Notice
on the picture below the number oflanes at the io(erarcdou' 2 lanes merge into Ottawa from Fischer -
Hallman and there is no traffic light atNine Pines audValleyvicvv Rd.
Ascan beseen from the pictures above, the zoning change proposal iaakin to changing Victoria Park
zoning ioallow ahigh rise apartment building to bebuilt in the middle ofit. There are better places for
such projects ootfarfnoroibeproposedsite(ooeofdhezocanbeseeulodbeOrstPicturcabovp)tbaL
would certainly appease our concerns.
In Suozn/ory, the for the following reasons:
I.. Major adverse impact ouabuidugyrnpertes.
o1OXnoise and air pollution from 23cars
elO}{garbage smell from 2Ounits
• increase backyard flooding
• decrease ioproperty values
2. Safety concern related {o adding 23 caro so close to dangerous intersection.
3. Too radical zoning change for the block which is currently comprised of 77% RES -2, 15%
RES -4 and 8% Commercial lots. No multiple dwelling buildings io the block.
Carlos BmzaeOa
Page 59 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Carlos Bazzarella
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 6:39 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Paul Singh
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments for Zoning By -Law Amendment - ZBA22/009/0/ES
Attachments: ByLawChange-letter.pdf
Please see attachment.
I have most of the property owners of Nine Pines Rd sign the petition.
Carlos.
Page 60 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Carlos Bazzarella
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 8:06 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Paul Singh
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Comments for Zoning By -Law Amendment - ZBA22/009/0/ES
Hi Eric,
Thank you for the message. Please include these extra comments in the public record.
Regarding the comment about traffic, it will certainly be nicer to exit the new building facing forward instead of
reversing, but that doesn't help anybody else. The people to the left, right and the order side of the street will have to
deal with another 23 cars.
Also important to mention is that it is impossible to exit Nine Pines Rd. and make a left turn. This is due to traffic and
people not letting you in. We have to go back to Williamsburg Rd. and make a left. The problem is that the lineup now is
passing Williamsburg so it is getting harder and harder to make that left turn and the lineup is going to get longer with
another 23 cars.
I find it hypocritical that the proposal mentions "minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change" and
"encourages walking and cycling" while at the same time it adds 23 cars and destroys several large trees. It's also non -
credible to say that "There is no objective evidence that the proposed development of these lands would cause
unacceptable adverse effects" and one of the adverse effects is "g) loss of enjoyment of normal use of property". How
can it not affect neighbouring backyard enjoyment going from green heaven to asphalt hell?
There are empty lots not far from the proposed site. One at
63-67 Windale Cres. which is 213m away and a much closer one located at the same block only 93m away at 11
Williamsburg Rd.
Carlos
On 2022-06-20 15:06, Eric Schneider wrote:
> Hello Carlos,
> Thank you for providing comments for this development application. I
> can confirm they have been received and will be included in the public
> record.
> In regards to water drainage, the subject lands and surrounding block
> are not located within a Floodplain. Floodplains are typically in
> close proximity to the Grand River or its tributaries. The attached
> map shows the closest floodplain areas to be surrounding Voisin
> Greenway near the Sunrise Centre.
> The City has standards for stormwater management that apply to new
> developments such as this. If the application proceeds, the applicant
Page 61 of 410
> would be required to install infiltration galleries, and piping that
> would drain any stormwater collected from the roof of the building and
> the pavement parking lot to the City and Regions existing stormwater
> infrastructure at the street. In other words, any development on this
> site would result in a better, more controlled level of stormwater
> management and water drainage than currently exists on site today.
> Thank you for you concerns regarding traffic. Right now, the
> application is being reviewed by Transportation Staff from the City,
> the Region, and the Ministry of Transportation given it's proximity to
> the provincial highway Conestoga Parkway. Their comments will be
> publicly available prior to any decision being made on this
> application. It is important to note that the current site contains
> driveways, with vehicles backing out onto Ottawa Street. In the
> proposed concept plan, all vehicles would exit the site in a forward
> motion leaving from the parking lot rather than backing up onto
> Ottawa.
> Let me know if you have any other questions or comments.
> Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
> Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
> (519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994
> eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
> -----Original Message-----
• From: Carlos Bazzarella
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 6:39 PM
> To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
> Cc: Paul Singh <Paul.Singh@kitchener.ca>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments for Zoning By -Law Amendment -
> ZBA22/009/O/ES
> Please see attachment.
> I have most of the property owners of Nine Pines Rd sign the petition.
> Carlos.
Page 62 of 410
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2022 10:16 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for Development 1257 - 1265 Ottawa St S
I would like to strongly oppose to the new development on Ottawa street South
Ottawa street has way too much traffic as it is, constant road work doubling the size of the road, doubling the size of
the sidewalks, more foot traffic. I live I live at and the foot traffic, vandalism and garbage on my property is already
out of control, To add 20 more units and 23 more vehicles in the parking lot is just going to make it even harder to have
a nice family dwelling on this street.
We are also concerned about the privacy with windows and balconies being in our backyard and people looking down
onto our yard, loses all of our privacy.
Yours truly
The Hoelscher's
Sent trom my uaiaxy
Page 63 of 410
Eric Schneider
From: Colleen Stewart
Sent: Friday, June 3, 2022 5:57 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for Development 1257 and 1265 Ottawa St. S, Kitchener
Good morning -
I live at , one of the homes that would potentially be directly behind your proposed development. I
have lived in this neighbourhood for a very long time, and spend a great deal of time in the backyard enjoying nature
and de -stressing in a quiet, relaxed, secluded atmosphere. I enjoy reading and gardening in our backyard. This proposal
is extremely upsetting and disappointing. The homes this development would replace are not derelict, or run down
properties. They are existing homes with tenants living in them who understand the neighborhood and the neighbours.
We wholeheartedly welcome new members into our community as properties transfer ownership, but the noise level
from this many added units, some facing directly into our yard will cause a huge disruption to the enjoyment of our
home and yard, not to mention increased traffic in an intersection that is already extremely busy and heavily used. Your
development would not only change the dynamics of our neighborhood, but will affect my personal comfort level
outside, the enjoyment of my property, and I am baffled as to why you would choose this location for your proposal.
1100% do not support this proposal.
Colleen Stewart
Sent from my iPhone
Page 64 of 410
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2022 5:42 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1257 & 1265 Ottawa St S
Hi Eric,
We received the proposed development card. How do we say we don't approve of this development? We represent
A few of the concerns are:
1. The reduction of our home equity value
2. The total blockage of our solar panels that we still have another 15 years of contract on.
3. The increased vehicle traffic
4. The increased people and their noise
5. The proximity of the proposed unit to our building
6. Lack of privacy
7. Retaining wall causing a danger (lack of view to busy traffic) to enter and exit our driveway. We already have
enough rear end collisions in front of Valleyview plus the number of people that blow past the school bus that
stops there in the morning.
8. Were is all the water going to be drained to?
I'm sure when we really have time to think about it, there will be other concerns.
Thanks
Jami Minda
1
Page 65 of 410
TVM 0NINIVild M,,W,K.ZM
dUNdd UUVUtl
000M
AVMIAIHO
z
nVHdsV
z
N N
N
CL
N �
�
wo ao
N
N
Ln
WJI,
WUQoma
oa
4�
Z
QO��
mid o � � � dd� � wwdwdw d d mw �m ma .d m w dm dm w d wd dm dd}d omo
m m �e
9
8�
e �
e ee�s
0
�v0a--010- ®
¢ 5 a o
ogE
-
D
w
w
o
aIHOd1Za AIS
ON NOZ Z—H
AVMIAIHO
nVHdsV
M��9b�lbodbN
9b6b
i
TVM 0NINIVild M,,W,K.ZM
dUNdd UUVUtl
000M
AVMIAIHO
z
nVHdsV
z
N N
N
CL
N �
�
� I
N
N
Ln
" 5b
�0OZ-�]P9 Nd�d `Z i�]Vcl
aIH3el]a 11OMS
ONINOZ Z�
LL -1