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
Why is this story here?
Big deal at city hallThis is a multi-year capital commitment involving hundreds of housing units (81 supportive + 296 mixed, 60 affordable), an Official Plan amendment (redesignating park land to mixed-use), heritage retention on a city-owned site, and a funding model (public-sector-led Toronto Builds) that differs from prior Housing Now partnerships. Reversing or significantly redirecting the project after approval would require substantial political capital and would affect long-term city land use and housing supply. The affordability period (40 years vs. prior 99-year terms) represents a departure from what was agreed in earlier housing programs, raising questions about future obligations.Felt nowThis is a hyperlocal issue with immediate present effects: six new towers are already rising in the neighborhood; transit (King streetcar) is already overcrowded; the community garden (29 years old, 60+ plots, 100+ people) will be displaced this week or soon; and the development will add hundreds of residents to a neighborhood that residents testify is already struggling with transit, schools, and traffic. These effects are being felt now by residents of 15 Stafford, 18 Stafford, and adjacent properties, not anticipated. The loss of green space is immediate. However, the effects are neighborhood-specific, not city-wide.
Stories are ordered by how much weight a decision carries and how directly it reaches daily life. They rise as a decision date approaches and fall as they age.