Who did what

• Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4) movedMoved and carried Deputy Mayor Malik's motion on the item; asked several pressing questions of staff about whether a formal plan exists, corporate beneficiaries, and the city's red lines; summarized that city staff and public have not been given full plans and the beneficiaries remain hidden.

From the floor

“The city is the party that has the planning responsibilities to residents. The city is the party that has to think about waterfront neighborhoods, schools, daycares, parks, complete communities, and the long-term integrity of the central waterfront vision. And the city is the level of government most clearly grounded in the daily reality that of people who bear those costs.”Speaker not identified

“Our waterfront is priceless. Our health is priceless and I have no intention of letting them take these things away from us for the sake of their profits.”Speaker not identified

“The current proposal would run right across that sailing area and constrain navigation through there. And jet blast wind speed at the edge of the marine exclusion zone boundary could cause small recreational boats to become unstable or at risk of capsizing.”Speaker not identified

“Research from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego has confirmed that sewage polluted water can transfer into the atmosphere through aerosols which can carry bacteria and chemical compounds from the water into the air where they can travel inland and expose people who never enter the water.”Speaker not identified

“The province and the Toronto Port Authority need to publicly reveal their plans, their business case, and the studies related to the expansion of the island airport. Torontonians and the public deserve to have those answers and to be seen very clearly in terms of whose interest this is all happening in.”Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10)

“The airport itself appears to be an entity that is being directed entirely from a foreign country. And it is very disturbing for people to find that out and I know we all want to know more.”Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 14)

“As of today, we do not know what person or persons or corporate entity ultimately controls and benefits from any proposal to expand that facility. So we can't really see through the corporate veil to know who the man behind the curtain is.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4)

Also in this item

• JP Morgan Investment Management (a subsidiary of JP Morgan Chase) is identified as an affiliate of the Infrastructure Investment Fund, which owns Newport Aviation (operator of Billy Bishop terminal). The report traces Newport ownership through Affinity Terminal Partners LP and NIPGP Trust, but city staff cannot determine ultimate controlling interests without retaining a specialist consultant. Staff were unable to verify who appoints Newport's board or controls its direction.

• The 2017 Porter proposal environmental assessment showed that closing the western gap of the inner harbor would reduce water inflow by over 50% and double the average residence time of water in the harbor. This is known to correlate with degraded water quality, increased E. coli and nutrients, higher risk of beach closures, and health effects for lake users. Current plans for a 600m+ runway extension would worsen these impacts.

• City staff confirmed they have not been provided a formal, comprehensive plan by the Toronto Port Authority or the province. The media reports suggest a 10-million-passenger capacity with potential expropriation of Little Norway Park and waterfront land, but no official plan has been submitted. Staff cannot assess impacts without a formal proposal.

• The report identifies that new buildings near the expanded airport would require enhanced building envelopes, non-operable windows, mechanical-only ventilation, and outdoor-space restrictions. The current ASHRAE ventilation standard (62.1) was not designed to protect against fine particulate matter or airborne pathogens, creating public health risks during power outages that coincide with poor-air-quality and heat events.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Residents can contact councillors before the next council vote on any motions arising from this committee discussion, respond to the federal government's summer 2026 consultation on the Tripartite Agreement, and continue submitting deputations if further committee hearings are held. A supplemental staff report addressing corporate-ownership transparency is expected at council.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Mayor Olivia Chow moved and questioned staffMoved the motion directing TCHC and city staff to develop a comprehensive plan on aging stock, deep retrofits, rebuilds, cooling and funding sources

From the floor

“the report says that we will need $4.5 billion... residents if we don't have funding after the year 2027”A deputant

“This is I not campaigning. This is a city of Toronto city space. No electioneering, no partisanship, not running”Mayor Olivia Chow

“in August the 4th I may be evicted from my unit. Unfortunately, they said they don't have more money”A deputant

“in some cases rebuilt like region park or like center park and looking at the funding sources”Mayor Olivia Chow

Also in this item

• TCHC faces a $4.5-billion state-of-good-repair shortfall once funding lapses after 2027, disclosed inside a routine AGM/financial-statements item.

• TCHC approved raising accessible-unit conversions to up to 50 units/month at roughly $80,000 per unit; soundproof conversions for mental-health needs are capped near $27,000, which the deputant argues is inadequate.

• A deputant living in TCHC housing says he faces eviction on August 4 for refusing to move to a unit that was not properly soundproofed.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

The comprehensive plan returns to committee/council next year; residents can depute then and contact councillors before the funding decisions in future budgets.

Decision

Chow's motion was carried and the item amended; the AGM/audited financials were received. A comprehensive plan on aging stock is to be reported back next year.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Also in this item

• The project retains the principal facades of Strachan House (built 1888 as one of Canada's largest planing mills) within the new building base, conserving cultural heritage while enabling 296 new rental units including 60 affordable units on City-owned land.

• The 8-storey supportive housing replacement building addresses the prior supportive housing use established by Homes First in 1996, which was a key adaptive reuse innovation at the site.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

City Council to approve alterations and demolitions under Ontario Heritage Act sections 33, 34(1)1, and 34(1)2; approve heritage easement agreement; permit 28-storey mixed-income rental building (296 units, 60 affordable) with Strachan House facade retained at base; permit 8-storey supportive housing replacement building.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23) moved and questioned staffMoved staff recommendation to approve zoning by-law amendment

From the floor

“The proposed building in metric height is 45 meters in height, 13 stories. As I mentioned, 259 units are proposed and that includes a range of room units from studio to three-bedroom units. However, it's also very important to understand that 77 of the units will be secured as affordable units and the 182 additional units will be rent controlled. This will be secured through a contribution agreement with the housing development office for a period of 40 years.”Speaker not identified

“I'm very happy to move the recommendations. Uh this building's in my ward. I want to thank the Neighbors Community Homes. This area, Kings Road, Galloway, Orton Park is one of our neighborhood improvement areas. So, this type of housing is very badly needed in my community.”Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23)

“The support that we've received in getting the zoning bylaw is exactly what is needed to get affordable housing projects built in the current context where um all orders of government want to see shovel ready projects. and our organization has the bandwidth to with city support to bring this project to that state and uh bring 259 units to West Hill.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• 40-year affordability lock: 77 units secured as affordable, 182 as rent-controlled, via contribution agreement with city Housing Development Office. This is an unusual length and structure for Toronto; most affordability agreements run 20-30 years.

• Access mechanism still in flux: city is building a new lottery-registry system (not yet live) for allocating units in affordable projects; staff could not specify qualification criteria or timeline at meeting.

• Site context: property has been derelict; site is in a designated neighbourhood improvement area (Kingston-Galloway-Orton Park) where affordable housing is explicitly identified as badly needed by ward councillor.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Zoning by-law amendment approved; staff recommendation carried unanimously without recorded opposition

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Also in this item

• Phase 2 construction begins Q4 2026 (within four months of meeting date), marking the start of active site works on a 45-hectare neighbourhood transformation affecting 1,208 current TCHC residents and removing 277 existing affordable units from stock during replacement.

• City committed to reimburse TCHC for infrastructure costs already incurred in 2026 before formal budget approval, indicating advance spending and financial dependency on retrospective council authorization.

• Phase 3 report-back deferred to 2030 with refined cost estimates promised 'as design advances'; infrastructure costs for a phase replacing 385 units and creating 2,512 new units (385 affordable, 2,127 market) remain unfinalised despite budget authorization requested now.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Adopted: City approved updated infrastructure cost estimates for Phases 2 and 3, authorized Toronto Water and Transportation Services to reimburse TCHC for 2026 eligible infrastructure costs from approved 2026-2035 capital budgets, and directed inclusion of refined cost estimates in 2027-2036 capital budget submissions.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Michael Thompson (Ward 21) movedMoved the recommendations and requested recorded vote

From the floor

“It's never easy. There's usually some give and take in these processes. But appreciate everyone's effort and being able to get it here today with a positive staff. Look forward to being approved.”Speaker not identified

“All those in favor of adopting the recommendations before you in the report. Councelor Thompson, Councelor Shan, Councelor Myers, Councelor Aninsley, Councelor Mantis. That item carries.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• Development includes 2,243 dwelling units and 38,233 square metres of non-residential space across eight towers ranging 12 to 48 storeys, making it a significant infill project in the Golden Mile area.

• Project adds public amenities including a new public park and two new public streets, beyond the residential and commercial components.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment approved unanimously by Scarborough Community Council.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“This is an example, a true example of efficiency. It is unbelievably expensive to all of us to have people who are homeless and showing up in emergency rooms or showing up at police stations. But here we're actually saving public money by making a public investment. This is a public public public partnership between the city of Toronto, the UHN, a public entity, and two other orders of government who are providing money. It's when the public institutions that belong to people work in concert to achieve outcomes that we really find a way forward.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4)

“Having a home changed that. For the first time in a long time, I had a place where I felt safe. I could sleep through the night, focus on my health, and start building routines that other people take for granted. I wasn't given a roof over my head. I was given the opportunity to rebuild my life. What makes Dun House special isn't just the apartment. It's the people. The staff know you by name.”Speaker not identified

“Many mailboxes in our building go unopened for weeks at a time because people don't think there's going to be anything there of value. There's going to be no resident parking. People will walk, take transit, use an Uber. How and when? How will people get their families, their kids to extracurricular activities like hockey and soccer and baseball?”Speaker not identified

“I certainly welcome the city's decision to replace Straw House left vacant for many years with a new structure, a new home for some of the many people in need of supportive housing in our city. However, I have concerns about the project as it now stands. The city to take this opportunity to seize that green space and put an eight-story building on the site, giving downtown Toronto a net loss of precious green space.”Speaker not identified

“The project proposes a new community garden will be made in the adjacent parkland. This means that years of established plants and trees and habitat will be destroyed. Community garden members have proposed a plan to maintain all or part of the existing garden site while still accommodating development. To simply move a garden on paper is certainly different in reality from the years of growth and habitat that have been established.”Speaker not identified

“There is no magic money tree. The eight-story building includes 81 new supportive housing units in a standalone building A along with 236 market rate apartments. While our housing now TTO volunteers are 100% in support of this new affordable housing redevelopment project, we would like a clear explanation for the city staff choice matrix that resulted in only having a 40-year affordability period for the 60 new affordable units within building B versus the 99-year affordability period that was achieved under other sites developed via private partnerships.”Speaker not identified

“As a regular TTC user, I will tell you many mornings I wait for five street cars on King at the corner of Strachan before I'm able to get on one. The idea of putting thousands of new residents in our neighborhood, we're going to have two new towers at the corner of King and Strachan. We have four towers going up on Tecumseth just a block away. We are already getting six new towers in this neighborhood with transit that already doesn't work.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• This is a City-owned Toronto Builds initiative site, not a private development. The public-sector financing and operation model is explicitly contrasted by Perks with problematic public-private partnerships, framing this as a structural approach to affordable housing delivery.

• Mark Richardson and Housing Now TTO requested supplementary transparency information be provided to staff before the council vote, including clarification on why this Toronto Builds project uses a 40-year affordability period vs. the 99-year periods achieved in earlier Housing Now projects (2019-2024). This flags a policy shift in affordability terms that may not be transparent in the staff report.

• Sandy Douglas testified that the city's public consultation process had serious procedural flaws: 9,000 notices mailed but not received by nearby residents, document addresses that reference non-existent buildings (57 Strachan, 801 Wellington in the middle of the park), and five to six people inserted into the April 15 public meeting to argue 'higher and faster,' with denial by facilitators but apparent skewing of final comments toward those terms.

• The community garden occupies public land within the development site and has 60 plots and over 100 gardeners; the proposal displaces it to an adjacent park area that is a known drainage/low area and already heavily used by dog walkers and residents. Community gardeners have proposed a plan to preserve at least part of the existing site.

• The neighborhood is already receiving six new towers in close proximity (two at King and Strachan, four on Tecumseth), with the Ontario Line (which would provide adequate transit) estimated to be 10 years away. Residents raised concerns that the building's car-free design ignores the practical need for services, ambulances, deliveries, and visitors on a narrow two-lane street.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Council vote on this item is scheduled for later in July 2026. Residents can contact councillors before that vote or attend the public hearing at council. Mark Richardson (Housing Now TTO) requested supplementary information be provided before council vote, so there may be a brief window for comment on amended staff reports.

Decision

Approved on committee vote (unanimous); moves to City Council for final decision.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“Buildings make winds worse for nearby houses by altering the natural flow of air through three primary forces. Downwashing, funneling, and corner vortices.”Speaker not identified

“These homes were built 60 years ago when no large buildings existed in the neighborhoods. The planners and builders of 60 years ago did not anticipate concentrated high gust of winds impacting the homes.”Speaker not identified

“The shadow study was found to meet the city's objectives in adequately limiting shadow. That was done by setbacks, massing of the building towards Birchmount and away from the neighbouring residential property.”City staff

“The wind study was found to be acceptable, except for pedestrians on a seasonal basis. That would be in and around the site. As you get further removed from the building, the impact would be lessened.”City staff

“As the community grows quite quickly with the very large proposed developments in the vicinity of the Agent Court Mall, there's a concern with the length of time it takes for residents to use public transit. There is no higher order transit than TTC buses in all of Ward 22.”Speaker not identified

“When you're building new development in communities, it's a balancing act that you need to make sure that everyone is comfortable with. I have full reassurance from our staff that they're doing everything properly that we can do to make sure that development is done in a proper way.”A councillor

Also in this item

• Wind concerns raised by neighbours cite damage to 60-year-old homes not built for concentrated wind gusts created by tall buildings; staff wind study found 'acceptable' only for grade-level pedestrian use, not for adjacent residential property impacts

• Area faces rapid density growth (Birchmount and Agent Court proposals) without higher-order transit; only bus service available; Shepard extension under study by Metrolinks with no timeline; RapidTO on Birchmount not in first tranche

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Staff recommendation approved unanimously (all in favour, none opposed). Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment adopted.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Official Plan Amendment approved to change the designation of 235 and 245 Yorkland Boulevard from General Employment Areas to Mixed Use Areas, with a Site and Area Specific Policy securing public road, public park, affordable housing, maximum floor space index, minimum non-residential gross floor area, and building heights.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Michael Thompson (Ward 21) questioned staffQuestioned the composition of the facility's board, governance of the 50% public-use requirement, enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance, and parking solutions; noted past issues with shared-space agreements not working as intended.
• Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23) questioned staffRaised concerns about transit accessibility for the large Tamil community within walking distance, parking overflow on residential streets, and community involvement in Phase 2 planning; asked how the public would be involved in future site decisions.

From the floor

“In 2017, with the support of the former mayor, we were able to move a motion to ask the city staff to work together with the community to explore opportunities for the community to build a community center. The area was heavily underserviced. In the early 2000s when this community was built there was an informal promise of a community center that never materialized in the local neighborhood.”Councillor Lily Cheng (Ward 18)

“It is being built through a grassroots community initiative. The city provided the lease, but the community came together, advocated for other levels of government, and more importantly raised $17 million already in a tight economic situation with over 850 families donating $10,000 each.”Councillor Lily Cheng (Ward 18)

“We were not able to advance the auditorium because those are questions that could not be answered at this time. There was no sense of how transit could be increased, whether satellite parking could be made available, the walkway of the community center and the catchment of it as well.”City staff

“The 50% has been stipulated through the lease agreement as well as the community access agreement. The community access agreement speaks to notification of the broader community and local groups that they are aware of space at the center and if they apply for space and the space is available that decision gets made through the joint use agreement.”City staff

Also in this item

• The Tamil Community Center project is funded entirely through grassroots effort, with 850+ families each donating $10,000, raising $17 million without city subsidy; council staff and the applicant did not disclose or address ongoing governance and compliance-enforcement uncertainty, instead deferring it to Phase 2.

• Phase 2 (auditorium expansion) is indefinitely deferred: council flagged transit capacity and parking as unsolved, but the transcript does not identify when or how these constraints will be studied, nor when Phase 2 will return to committee.

• A 50% public-use requirement is locked into a lease and community access agreement, but governance of that 50% and enforcement of non-compliance rest on a corrective-action mechanism in the lease rather than proactive city oversight; council did not resolve who decides space allocation or how the public will access it.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Phase 2 planning will invite community input through a notice of intention to lift holds and a public comment period. The community may also write to staff during site plan review for Phase 1 and any Phase 2 hold-lifting application.

Decision

Approved zoning amendment for 3030 Markham Road to permit gas station with ancillary retail and car wash, clearing the way for Phase 1 Tamil Community Center. Phase 2 auditorium deferred pending feasibility study on transit, parking, and site plan refinement.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23) movedMoved the heritage designation of 32 Bright Street

From the floor

“Councilor Myers is going to move it. All right. All those in favor? Opposed? Carried.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• 32 Bright Street is one of eighteen pre-1870 properties the city must designate or delist by January 1, 2027, under provincial Bill 23 amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Carried (no recorded dissent or amendment in the available transcript)

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“That area from what I understand suffers from basement flooding and erosion of the because it's near the bluffs. Do staff have any comments on that in terms of what the likely impact will be on the by the removal of trees?”A councillor

“Through the chair, urban forestry, we worked with the applicant to increase the amount of tree preservation on the site. Since the beginning to the current iteration of the plan, there is increase of 23 permit trees that are preserved as well as a number of non-permanent size regulated trees within the site. We've also worked with community planning to cut out the underground parking garage to also increase tree preservation capabilities for the site as well.”City staff

Also in this item

• 22-month westbound lane closure on Military Trail during student housing construction creates traffic impact in Scarborough corridor.

• Area prone to basement flooding; tree preservation gains (23 permit trees) and underground parking design change were negotiated to manage stormwater runoff.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Approved: westbound curb lane closure on Military Trail for 22 months (September 2026 to July 2028) to stage construction of 1650 Military Trail Phase 2 (student housing).

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“Anyone want to do anything? Councilor Croanti is moving it. All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that carries.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• The 90-day legal deadline is July 29-31, 2026. If Council does not act by then, the Ontario Heritage Act restricts further designation efforts on this property, effectively removing a key tool to shape the developer's proposal.

• 55 Elm Street is one of 26 surviving heritage buildings along three contiguous blocks of Elm Street, comprising the most intact grouping of St. John's Ward-era built fabric in Toronto. Designation protects a broader understanding of the city's first immigrant neighbourhood.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Residents may depute to City Council before the July 29-31 meeting when Council must formally decide. The Heritage Conservation Bylaw process allows public input during the designation notice period following Council's decision.

Decision

Committee recommends to Council that the property be designated under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, meeting 5 of 9 prescribed criteria. Vote: unanimous (no opposition voiced).

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10) deputedLand owner; stated this is his dream project and asked council to help him open the business

From the floor

“We have reviewed the staff's report and the recommendations and don't have any concerns with what has been provided. We support the recommendation for approval and we thank staff for the diligent work on bringing this forward. They've been at this since 2018, 2019. So it's been several years to this point.”Speaker not identified

“I own this land to open the project for the community. Actually that's my dream. So really appreciate if you help me out to open this business.”Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10)

Also in this item

• Application took approximately 5-6 years from initial submission (2017-2018) to final zoning approval, typical timeline for complex site plan coordination

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Zoning amendment approved to permit gas station and associated car wash at 3030 Markham Road; applicant to finalize site plan with city staff

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Also in this item

• The 55 Sudbury Street property, built 1899-1900, meets five of nine Ontario Regulation 9/06 criteria for municipal heritage designation, exceeding the minimum threshold of two criteria.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Residents can depute or submit written comments if the item appears on a future Council agenda. The formal designation process requires a Council vote following this notice of intention.

Decision

The item advanced to City Council with a recommendation to state the city's intention to designate 55 Sudbury Street under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23) questioned staffAsked detailed questions about maximum parking capacity (114 spaces identified), overflow parking strategies, street parking mitigation on Staines Road, community access provisions and the 50% operating-hours agreement, and staff feasibility of a 425-person auditorium with only 114 parking spaces.

From the floor

“We have implemented a holding provision over the auditorium phase 2 portion of the site. This means that prior to any development of the auditorium or phase 2 occurring, the TCC board must satisfy certain conditions, including a study that assesses transportation impacts including parking and makes recommendations that must be accepted by the city. And second, the TCC board must secure that parking, whether it be on-site, off-site, shared parking strategies or others, or seek a reduction in the overall size of that auditorium.”City staff

“In 2021, the city contributed to the project with the land lease at dollar 1 per year; the land's estimated value is $25 million. Last year, council also waived the zoning bylaw amendment fee of $80,000. We have raised 17 million dollars from the community itself, and beyond major donors it came from 850 grassroot level of community members who have been contributing towards this project.”Speaker not identified

“I believe the agreement spec stipulates that 50% of the time the facilities need to be open to community use. Could you just expand on that and what it actually means? Is that the vision for the Tamil community center—while yes it will be funded and a lot of the activities will be centered on serving the Tamil community, there will be services, facilities, programming available for the wider community as well.”Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23)

Also in this item

• Phase 2 auditorium (425-person capacity estimated) cannot proceed until parking is studied and secured; only 114 on-site spaces are currently possible, creating a hard constraint on the building's future size independent of funding.

• The city has committed $25 million in land value at $1 per year plus an $80,000 fee waiver; the Tamil community has raised $17 million from 850 grassroots donors, showing major institutional support for a single non-profit facility.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Approved the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment; Phase 1 proceeds with 60 parking spaces; Phase 2 auditorium placed under a Holding provision pending a parking and transportation study to be submitted by the Tamil Community Centre board before the hold can be lifted.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12) movedMoved motion requesting three-year extension from province and coordination with GTA municipalities and AMO

From the floor

“The provincial government has made a decision to forcefully remove heritage listed properties and make it very very difficult to ensure that there is a reasonable time frame to be able to consider whether or not these properties be fully designated”Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12)

“There is a in my opinion a very false narrative that sometimes ensues in these debates over planning between the need for housing and progress and ensuring that there is adequate housing supply and protecting what we also love and value. I believe that good planning can accommodate both.”Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12)

“The story of Toronto goes back thousands of years. And you know even the you know the first peoples who walked these lands I walk along Davenport which was an indigenous trail it was actually on the shore of the ancient lake Irakqua.”Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12)

Also in this item

• About 4,000 Toronto heritage properties currently listed on the municipal register will be automatically removed on January 1, 2027 unless formally designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; 21,000 properties across Ontario face the same deadline.

• Properties that lose listing status cannot be re-listed for another five years, making the January 1, 2027 deadline effectively permanent for undesignated properties.

• The province previously extended the deadline from January 1, 2025 to January 1, 2027 through Bill 200 (Homeowner Protection Act, 2024), citing housing affordability pressures.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

No deputation window or comment period noted in the transcript. This is a request to the province; residents could contact their MPP or attend any future city council vote on this motion.

Decision

Motion moved by Councillor Matlow requesting the province extend the Ontario Heritage Act designation deadline from January 1, 2027 to January 1, 2030. The motion also requests the mayor coordinate with GTA municipalities and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario to seek the extension and forward the item to them for information.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Approved the Draft Plan of Subdivision at 9940 Sheppard Avenue East, including the creation of a new public park and connecting street.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“Councilor Niad is moving that. All those in favor? Opposed? Carried.”Speaker not identified

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Designation affirmed (moved by Niad, carried unanimously)

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Also in this item

• Phase 1 is backed by secured funding for enabling infrastructure; Phase 2 will proceed over time as funding and priorities evolve, with design flexibility.

• Approval is conditional on transfer of streets and parkland to City ownership, locking in public realm commitments on a large waterfront site.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Draft Plan of Subdivision approved by the Executive Director, Development Review, acting under delegated authority, subject to conditions including transfer of streets and parkland to City ownership and provision of municipal services and infrastructure.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Also in this item

• Development includes demolition of one occupied affordable rental unit, a potential tension with the broader affordable housing mission of the Social Medicine Housing Initiative partnership

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“I think a name will tell the story of what the building is about, what the services are going to be about. It's the same thing with the naming of Taiu. Taiu is an African name, a Swahili name, which means be in good health.”Speaker not identified

“She's also the first black woman to be appointed to the Victorian Order of Nurses. And so it is with that spirit that we are supporting this naming.”Speaker not identified

“Representation matters. It inspires young people, honors those who have come before us, and strengthens the connections between communities and the services designed to support them.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• The facility will include a Black-focused care unit, designed to serve Black and racialized communities with culturally tailored care.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Motion passed unanimously to name the long-term care home in honor of Bernice Redmond.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“As a result of our audit, we did not identify any unusual or fraudulent transactions that should be reported to you. We also did not identify any significant control deficiencies that should be reported to you.”Speaker not identified

“The financial information that has been transferred over to the new system is complete and accurate and there are no significant issues to report.”Speaker not identified

“We will be issuing a clean audit opinion on the consolidated financial statements.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• The city completed a major financial-system conversion in 2025; auditors confirmed data transfer was complete and accurate with no significant IT issues

• No fraud, no significant control deficiencies, and no material misstatements identified across the city proper, Toronto Hydro, TTC, and Toronto Community Housing

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Clean audit opinion issued on consolidated financial statements; no material adjustments required

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video