Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 5, 2026

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003813

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

Applicant/Appellant: Infinity Development Group Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request

Description: to permit a 29-storey, 295-unit mixed-use building

Reference Number: 505-09/21

Property Address: 1029-1033 Waterdown Road

Municipality/UT: Burlington/Halton

OLT Case No: OLT-22-003813

OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-003813

OLT Case Name: Infinity Development Group Inc v. Burlington (City.)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application

Description: to permit a 29-storey, 295-unit mixed-use building

Reference Number: 520-10/21

Property Address: 1029-1033 Waterdown Road

Municipality/UT: Burlington/Halton

OLT Case No: OLT-22-003814

OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-003813

Heard: January 27, 2026, in Writing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Infinity Development Group Inc.	D. Baker
City of Burlington	B. Hurley
Region of Halton	B. Maione

DECISION DELIVERED BY S. DEBOER AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1The Tribunal scheduled a Written Hearing in accordance with Rule 12 of Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure to review the proposed settlement between Infinity Development Group Inc. (“Appellant”) and the City of Burlington (“City”). The Appellant had filed appeals with the Tribunal due to the City’s refusal of the Official Plan Amendment Application (“OPA”) and the Zoning By-law Amendment Application (“ZBA”) pertaining to the addresses municipally known as 1029-1033 Waterdown Road (“Subject Lands”).

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

2When considering appeals filed pursuant to s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) of the Planning Act (“Act”), the Tribunal must have regard to matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act. Decisions of the Tribunal affecting planning matters must be consistent with the applicable policies of the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS 2024”), and in this matter, conform to the Halton Region Official Plan (“HOP”), City of Burlington Official Plan(“BOP”), City of Burlington New Official Plan (“New OP”), Official Plan Amendment Number 2 (“OPA 2”), and Burlington Zoning By-law 2020, as amended (“By-law 2020”).

SUBJECT LANDS AND SURROUNDING AREA

3The Subject Lands are made up of 2 properties located beside each other. Each address is municipally known as 1029 and 1033 Waterdown Road. The Subject Lands are located on the east side of Waterdown Road, approximately 90 metres (“m”) north of the Plains Road East and Waterdown Road intersection. The Subject Lands are rectangular in shape with an approximate total area of 2, 614 square metres (“m²”) and an approximate total frontage of 48.67 m along Waterdown Road and an approximate depth of 53.9 m. Each separate parcel currently houses a 1.5 storey detached dwelling that will be demolished as part of the settlement proposal.

4The Subject Lands are in the south-west portion of Aldershot, which has a mixture of predominately residential and commercial uses. Most of the commercial uses are located on Plains Road. This portion of Aldershot is bordered by a fishway canal to the west, Highway 403 to the north, the Queen Elizabeth Way to the East and Burlington Bay to the south. The Aldershot Go Station is located approximately 550 m from the Subject Lands and forms apart of the Aldershot GO Major Transit Station Area (“MTSA”).

5Immediately surrounding the Subject Lands are other proposed redevelopments of lands that include a mixture of townhouse complexes, and mid-rise and tall mixed-use buildings varying in size from seven to 32 storeys in height.

6The Subject Lands are currently served by public transit, including a bus stop located 50 m away with buses running every 10-15 minutes. Also, there is a bus route that runs every 30 minutes on weekdays and every hour on weekends that services the Aldershot GO Station and provides service between Appleby GO Station and downtown Hamilton. The Aldershot GO Station provides train service every 30 minutes to Union Station in downtown Toronto and every hour to West Harbour GO in Hamilton. The Aldershot GO Station also provides VIA train service to other locations throughout Ontario.

7The Appellant completed a pre-consultation with the City on January 8, 2021. The application was deemed complete on January 11, 2022. The original proposal would permit a 29-storey mixed-use building with an overall building height of approximately 107.10 m including the mechanical penthouse. The original proposal included a 4-storey podium with 189 m² of retail space, 295 resident parking spaces, 15 visitor parking spaces and 60 bicycle parking spaces. Above the podium, 296 residential units were proposed with a unit mix of 77% one-bedroom units and 23% two-bedroom units. The total proposed gross floor area was approximately 21,439.0 m² and a total amenity area of approximately 5,224.0 m².

8On April 12, 2022, City council refused the applications and subsequently, the Appellant filed an appeal to the Tribunal.

9Since the time of the appeal, the Parties worked together to find some common ground on the applications. As a result, the Parties had submitted revised planning instruments for review and approval by the Tribunal, which have the effect of implementing the proposed settlement.

SUBMISSIONS

10Prior to the commencement of the Hearing, the Tribunal received the following documents and marked said documents as exhibits to the hearing:

Exhibit 1: Affidavit of David Falletta and related planning documents; comprising of 62 pages

Planning Evidence

11Based on the curriculum vitae presented in Exhibit 1, the Tribunal qualified Mr. Falletta as an expert in land use planning and his Affidavit would reflect his expert opinions on the matter before the Tribunal.

12Mr. Falletta opined that throughout the meeting process between the Parties, many changes were made to the proposal, and these agreed upon changes can be seen in the Table listed below:

Table 1 – Statistical Comparison

	Original Proposal	Settlement Proposal
Site Area (sq. m.)	2,614	2,614
Total Gross Floor Area (sq. m.) • Residential • Commercial/Retail	21,493 21,304 189	21,593 21,083 510
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)	8.2:1	8.26:1
Building Height	29-storey + mech. penthouse	24-storeys+ mech. penthouse
Total Residential Units • 1-bedroom • 2-bedroom	295 228 (77.2 %) 67 (22.8 %)	279 215 (77%) 64 (23%)
Total Vehicular Parking • Resident • Visitor	320 295 25	256 242 14
Total Amenity Space (sq. m.) • Per unit	5224 17.7	5,215 18.7

[Section 2](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html#sec2_smooth) of the [Planning Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html)

13It was Mr. Falletta’s opinion that the settlement proposal before the Tribunal has appropriate regard to matters of provincial interest as per s. 2 of the Act. The proposal will not impact the natural heritage system, agricultural resources, or any natural or mineral resources. The proposal will be developed with residential dwellings that will have no significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or scientific interest. The proposal will be subject to future site plan control which will make sure that the proposal will be built with an efficient use of energy and water. The proposal will be supported by existing infrastructure services and addresses needed housing choices in the City while implementing the City’s Mixed Use Nodes and Intensification Corridors in an area of the City that is a focus of residential and employment growth.

PPS 2024

14Mr. Falletta opined that the settlement proposal is consistent with the PPS 2024 as the settlement will add new apartment housing and commercial amenities close to the MTSA. The proposal will add a range of needed housing options on two underutilized parcels of land. The proposal will facilitate growth and mixed-use development within a strategic growth area of the City. The proposal will be transit-supportive while providing an appropriate mix of housing to meet the long-term goals of the City.

HOP

15Mr. Falletta stated that on July 1, 2024, the province through changes to the Act, deemed the Region of Halton as an upper-tier municipality without planning responsibilities. The HOP continues to be in-force, but the administration of the HOP now falls with the City. The HOP designates the Subject Lands as in an Urban Area as per Map 1 – Regional Structure and as being apart of a Major Transit Station Area on Map 1h, and apart of the Aldershot GO MTSA.

16It was Mr. Falletta’s opinion that the settlement proposal conforms to the HOP as a whole, as the settlement will assist with building a healthy community as it will provide for a range of housing options and will help the City and Region achieve their employment and population intensification targets. Mr. Falletta continued to opine that the settlement conforms to the Region of Halton’s objectives for the Urban Area as this area is a focus of growth and intensification and will help the Region meet the mixed-use objectives in an MTSA area. Mr. Falletta opined that the settlement would help the region achieve its housing target, which is that a minimum of 65% of all new housing be in the form of townhouses or multi-storey buildings.

BOP

17In Mr. Falletta’s opinion, the settlement conforms to the general intent of the BOP as the settlement will redesignate the Subject Lands to Mixed Use Corridor – General, which aligns with the policy framework in an MTSA. The settlement will add housing options that is compatible with the surrounding land uses and promotes an efficient intensification for the Subject Lands. As the Subject Lands are within an MTSA, Mr. Falletta opined that the Subject Lands are apart of a “Primary Growth Area” which allows for mixed use development to occur in a compact form that is not solely meant for employment uses.

18Mr. Falletta continued to opine that the size and shape of the proposal are consistent with the City’s Tall Building Guidelines and the newly proposed designation of the Subject Lands conforms to the BOP. The settlement proposes an OPA that includes site-specific policies in order to increase the Floor Area Ratio from 1.5:1 to 8.5:1 and permit a building height increase from six storeys to 25 storeys. This increase aligns with other site-specific amendments which had been previously approved in the surrounding area. As such, the proposed amendment is compatible with the existing and planned land uses in the surrounding area.

New OP

19On April 26, 2018, the City approved a New OP, which was subject to approval by Halton Region. On November 30, 2020, Halton Region approved the New OP. 48 appeals of the New OP were filed, including the Appellants to this matter. It was Mr. Falletta’s opinion that the settlement before the Tribunal addresses the general intent of the New OP as the settlement provides for residential and mixed-use intensification in a Primary Growth Area and in a MTSA. The settlement is proposed at a density that will help the City achieve its growth targets. Mr. Falletta continued with his opinion that the settlement is designed in a compact form that is transit supportive and will provide for an adequate amount of housing options on an underutilized site within a MTSA.

OPA 2

20Mr. Falletta gave opinion that OPA 2 implemented the findings of the MTSA Area Specific Planning Project on June 18, 2025. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing approved OPA 2 with some modifications. However, the City was notified that OPA 2 had been appealed on October 31, 2025. Therefore, significant portions of the land use designation policies, including those pertaining to the Subject Lands, are under appeal and not in effect.

21Mr. Falletta continued with his opinion that the settlement adequately addresses the general intent of OPA 2, as the settlement aligns with the vision of OPA 2 and provides for a mix of uses in a tall building form. The designated ground floor commercial and residential uses are permitted in OPA 2. Mr. Falletta continued to opine that the settlement requires an updated Functional Servicing Report as part of the future site plan application that will be satisfactory to the City and the Region, and as part of the Final Order for the settlement before the Tribunal.

22It was Mr. Falletta’s opinion that the Urban Design and Public Realm policies have been addressed through the orientation and setbacks that have been applied to the proposal. Additionally, a revised Shadow Study and revised Wind Study are required as part of the future site plan application.

By-law 2020

23It was Mr. Falletta’s opinion that the ZBA proposes rezoning from Mixed Use Employment Corridor (“MXE”) to Mixed Use General Corridor (“MXG”). The proposed site-specific zoning change will allow for the settlement proposal to maintain conformity to the By-law 2020 by permitting residential development to occur on the Subject Lands. The ZBA is a minor amendment that is necessary to allow the proposed settlement to occur and is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the By-law.

Conclusions and Recommendations

24It was Mr. Falletta’s opinion that the settlement proposal before the Tribunal has regard for matters of provincial interest as per s. 2 of the Act. The settlement proposal is consistent with the PPS 2024 and conforms with the applicable policies of the ROP, conforms with the old and new BOP, and meets the general intent and purpose of the By-law 2020. The settlement proposal before the Tribunal is an effective use of underutilized lands and represents good land use planning.

25It was Mr. Falletta’s recommendation that the Tribunal allow the appeal on an interim basis, and a final order should be withheld until the City confirms with the Tribunal that the final form of the OPA and ZBA is satisfactory to the City.

26It was Mr. Falletta’s further recommendation that the Tribunal should withhold its final order until the City confirms that it has received the following to their satisfaction:

a. A survey and complete set of Architectural Plans.

b. A revised land use compatibility Study for Noise and Vibration, and Air Quality; and,

c. An updated Transportation Impact Study to reflect current conditions.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

27Having received the uncontroverted evidence and expert opinion of Mr. Falletta, and the Tribunal receiving the uncontested submissions of the Parties in support of the appeals before the Tribunal, the Tribunal accepts the evidence of Mr. Falletta, and the Tribunal is satisfied that the OPA and the ZBA meets the statutory tests.

28The Tribunal finds that the planning instruments that implement the settlement proposal are a matter of provincial interest as per Section 2 of the Act, as they will provide needed density within a MTSA. The Tribunal finds that the proposal has demonstrated that it is consistent with the applicable policy framework of the PPS 2024, as the proposal will help promote efficient land use and intensification that is in a compact form.

29The Tribunal finds that the proposal, as presented, has demonstrated its conformity to the ROP, the BOP and the City of Burlington Zoning By-law 2020, as amended, as the proposal will provide for an appropriate redevelopment that will add needed housing options within a MTSA.

30The Tribunal finds that the proposal is designed to fit harmoniously within the existing neighbourhood while providing an appropriate amount of residential density within a MTSA.

31The Tribunal finds the OPA and ZBA as presented should be conditionally approved with an Interim Order. The Final Order will be withheld until the Tribunal receives written confirmation from the City Solicitor that the proposed conditions listed below in the Interim Order have been met.

INTERIM ORDER

32THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed, in part, on an interim basis, and that the Official Plan Amendment is approved in principle as attached below as Attachment 1 to this Interim Order.

33THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed, in part, on an interim basis, and the Zoning By-law Amendment is approved in principle as attached below as Attachment 2 to this Interim Order.

34The Tribunal will withhold the issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation from the City Solicitor of the following pre-requisite matters:

1. The Tribunal has received, and approved, the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment submitted in a final form, confirmed to be satisfactory to the City Solicitor and;

2. The City confirms it has received and is satisfied with:

a. A survey of the Subject Lands and a complete set of architectural drawings:

b. A revised land use compatibility study for Noise and Vibration, and Air Quality;

c. An updated Traffic Impact Study to reflect current conditions.

35The Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final draft of the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-Law Amendment, and the issuance of the Final Order.

36If the Parties do not submit the final drafts of the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment, and provide confirmation that all other contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order set out in paragraph [34] above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order, by Tuesday, December 1, 2026, the Appellant and the City shall provide a written status report to the Tribunal by that date, as to the timing of the expected confirmation and submission of the final form of the draft Amendments and issuance of the Final Order by the Tribunal. In the event that the Tribunal fails to receive the required status report, and/or in the event that the contingent pre-requisites are not satisfied by the date indicated above, or by such other deadline as the Tribunal may impose, the Tribunal may then dismiss the appeal.

37The Tribunal may, as necessary, arrange the further attendance of the Parties by Telephone Conference Call to determine the additional timelines and deadline for the submission of the final form of the instrument, the satisfaction of the contingent pre-requisites and the issuance of the Final Order.

“S. deBoer”

S. DEBOER MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.

Attachment 1

Attachment 2