Council passed By-law BL-0154-2026 on September 29, 2026, designating 42 Queen Street South in Streetsville under section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, 56 days after its notice of intention. The last date to appeal is November 6, 2026. The other property in the August 4 notices, 20 Thomas Street, had no by-law on that agenda; as of October 13, 2026 the City has published no notice of passing or withdrawal for it, and the Act's 120-day limit for it is December 2, 2026.
Streetsville heritage against out-of-scale towers
The tension: A City-approved heritage-conservation framework meant to guide growth against proposals the ward councillor calls out of scale for it, and says residents share that concern.
Streetsville is a historic village with a Heritage Conservation District Plan, approved in December 2024. An application then proposed 18- and 22-storey towers on a site outside the District's boundary, so the Plan does not formally govern it. The site's designation, as reported in January 2025, permits townhouses of up to three storeys. The application asks to change the official plan and zoning.
The file is now marked Appealed. Council decided in April 2026 to oppose the application at the Ontario Land Tribunal, and the outcome rests with the Tribunal. The City's page for the application lists neither that decision nor the staff report behind it. They appear only in the meeting minutes.
The questions below ask what height standard should hold at the District's edges, and how residents can tell when a file has left council's hands.
Resolution Options
Questions you can ask
To: ward-11The 18- and 22-storey towers proposed at Thomas Street and Joymar Drive sit outside the Heritage Conservation District, so its Plan doesn't formally govern them. The site's designation, as INsauga reported it in January 2025, permits townhouses of up to three storeys, and the application asks to change the official plan and zoning. Will you commit to a height standard for the areas bordering the District — and say whether a single site-specific application should be able to change it?
To: allThe City's page for the Thomas Street application (OZ/OPA 25-3 W11) marks it Appealed — a route the City's own notice says runs through the Ontario Land Tribunal — but does not list the February 18, 2026 staff report or Council's April 1, 2026 decision to oppose the application at the Tribunal; those appear only in the meeting minutes. What would you have the City publish so residents can tell when a file has left council's hands: whether council had decided it before the appeal, how many files go to appeal each year, or something else you should name?
Candidates on record
The full story
Streetsville is a historic village whose heritage is formalized in a Streetsville Heritage Conservation District Plan (approved December 2024). Despite that, an 18- and 22-storey tower proposal (De Zen Group, Joymar Drive area) was brought forward and described by Ward 11 Coun. Brad Butt as “unprecedented” for a historic village — his words, to INsauga in January 2025: “…18 and 22 stories, that’s just completely unprecedented for a historic village like Streetsville.” A wrinkle that sharpens the tension: the tower site sits outside the Heritage Conservation District boundary — so the very framework meant to guide growth here doesn’t formally govern it. What governs scale there is the site’s existing designation — residential medium density, with townhouses of up to three storeys permitted, as INsauga reported in January 2025 — and the application asks to change the official plan and zoning.
The file has gone to appeal
This is the part that matters most for an election, and it is easy to miss. The application — OZ/OPA 25-3 W11, which the City’s statutory notice describes as “a 12 storey building and 18 and 22 storey buildings connected by an eight storey podium” — was filed in January 2025, and its notice set a statutory public meeting at the Planning and Development Committee for May 26, 2025. The City’s own development-application page now carries one word above the applicant’s name: Appealed.
The City’s application page lists no staff report and no council decision; the committee and council minutes do. The page’s published document list runs to the public notice and the sixty documents of the original January 2025 submission, and stops. At the statutory public meeting on May 26, 2025, the Planning and Development Committee received a staff report dated May 7, 2025 “for information” and asked staff to report back “prior to the earlier of 120 days from May 26, 2025, or following a resubmission filed by the applicant”. On March 9, 2026 the committee, on a motion by Coun. Butt carried 11 to 0, recommended that Council direct Legal Services “to oppose the subject applications … before the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT)”, consistent with a staff report dated February 18, 2026. Council approved that recommendation on April 1, 2026.
Corrected 2026-10-02. This paragraph said a staff recommendation to refuse, which had been reported to us, could not be found (“searched on August 1, 2026, not found”). That search covered the application page only. The committee minutes of March 9, 2026 record a staff report dated February 18, 2026 that concludes the proposal is “not acceptable from a planning perspective and should not be approved”. The report itself has not been read here.
Whatever a candidate says about heights in Streetsville, this file is marked Appealed, and the City’s notice says application decisions are appealed “through the Ontario Land Tribunal”, which holds “the hearing of an appeal”. The City’s page does not say when the appeal was filed or what it is against. Council’s decision of April 1, 2026 was a position for that hearing: to oppose the applications “before the Ontario Land Tribunal”. The outcome now rests with the Tribunal. That is the real question to put to anyone campaigning on it: not what they would have voted, but what the City should do, and publish, when a file goes to appeal before council has decided the application itself.
The other tool: two Streetsville notices dated August 4, 2026
Added 2026-08-11. As of July 29, 2026, council “intends to pass a by-law” under section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act to designate 20 Thomas Street and 42 Queen Street South as of cultural heritage value. The designation itself is made by that by-law (section 29(1)). Notices issued August 4; any objection must reach the City Clerk by 4:30 p.m. on September 3, 2026 — seven weeks before the election. Both properties trace to Streetsville’s Graydon builders: 42 Queen Street South is associated with William and John Graydon, and “a number of the surviving 19th century buildings are credited to this family”; 20 Thomas Street was built by Joseph Phair, John Graydon’s foreman, who “is credited with having constructed, and provided input on, many buildings in Streetsville.”
This was not a response to the towers, and it would be easy to write it as one. The same meeting produced notices of intention for seven designations across four wards — 1, 2, 6 and 11. It is a city-wide heritage action that happens to include two Streetsville properties, and nothing in the City’s notices refers to the tower application.
What makes it matter here is the instrument, not the motive. A Heritage Conservation District Plan governs a defined area under Part V of the Act — and the problem stated above is that the 18- and 22-storey proposal sits outside that boundary, so the Plan does not reach it. Individual designation under Part IV works property by property and does not depend on the District boundary at all.
So designation outside the District is not hypothetical: as of July 29, 2026 council started it for two properties in this ward, and the objection window closed on September 3, 2026 — before anyone votes. Each notice names one property, “the lands and premises” at that address, and states no rule for the land around it. The District Plan, quoting the Provincial Planning Statement, adds one: planning authorities “shall not permit development and site alteration on adjacent lands to protected heritage property unless the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved”, and the Plan defines protected heritage property to include property designated under Part IV.
But it is not fast, and that is the part a candidate should be asked about. Checked 2026-09-05 against the City’s own publication feed: no notice of passing of a by-law designating either property had been published, and no withdrawal published. Whether anyone objected is not in the City’s publication feed, which carries the intention and the outcome, not the objections; if an objection was served, the Act requires council to consider it and decide whether to withdraw the notice (section 29(6)). What the record does show is the interval. In the same feed, thirteen designations whose notice of intention was published from 2025-06-30 onward have a published notice of passing (counting 1400 Dixie Road from its 2025-12-15 notice; an earlier one was published 2025-05-28), and the gap between the two notices ran from 50 days (4646 Heritage Hills Boulevard, 2025-12-15 to 2026-02-03) to 120 days (972 Clarkson Road South, 2025-06-30 to 2025-10-28); ten of the thirteen took 80 days or fewer. Measured from August 4, 2026, 80 days is October 23 and 120 days is December 2 — so on that record the result could land on either side of the October 26 election. The Act sets the outer limit: the by-law “must be passed within 120 days after the date of publication of the notice of intention”, unless a prescribed circumstance applies (section 29(8)), which for these notices is December 2, 2026. Updated 2026-10-13: 42 Queen Street South is now designated. Council passed By-law BL-0154-2026 under section 29 on September 29, 2026, 56 days after the notice of intention; the City’s notice of passing is dated October 7, 2026 and gives 4:30 p.m. on November 6, 2026 as the last date to appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal. 20 Thomas Street is not: the September 29 agenda listed no by-law for it, and the City’s publication feed, checked 2026-10-13, carries no notice of passing or of withdrawal for it. Its 120-day limit is December 2, 2026.
That is worth putting to a candidate who says the District should be doing more work — the City has a second instrument, it is in active use, and the question is whether they would use it deliberately rather than as part of a periodic batch.
20 Thomas Street is on the same street as the 64 and 66 Thomas Street application now under appeal. The City’s notice makes no connection between them, and neither do we.
Fact-check
Streetsville is a historic village whose heritage is formalized in a Streetsville Heritage Conservation District Plan (approved December 2024). An 18- and 22-storey tower proposal (De Zen Group, Joymar Drive area) was described by Ward 11 Coun. Brad Butt as 'unprecedented' for the historic village. Note: the tower site itself sits outside the Heritage Conservation District boundary. QUOTE CONFIRMED 2026-08-01 from the INsauga article fetched directly (Karen Longwell, January 20 2025): the words are his, verbatim - …18 and 22 stories, that's just completely unprecedented for a historic village like Streetsville, Butt said. APPLICATION STATUS ADDED 2026-08-01 from the City's own development-application page for OZ/OPA 25-3 W11 (a 12-storey building plus 18- and 22-storey towers on an eight-storey podium; applicant DeZen Realty Company Limited; filed January 2025; statutory public meeting scheduled for May 26 2025): the City tags the file APPEALED, and the City's notice says application decisions can be appealed through the Ontario Land Tribunal. STAFF AND COUNCIL RECORD, corrected 2026-10-02: the City's application page lists no staff report and no council decision - its document list runs to the public notice plus the sixty documents of the original January 2025 submission and stops - and this entry previously recorded a reported staff recommendation to refuse as 'Searched 2026-08-01, not found'. The meeting minutes record it. PDC minutes of May 26 2025: the staff report dated May 7 2025 was 'received for information', with staff to report back (PDC-0022-2025; Council approved June 11 2025). PDC minutes of March 9 2026: PDC-0013-2026, moved by Councillor B. Butt and carried 11 to 0, that Council direct Legal Services 'to oppose the subject applications ... before the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) consistent with the recommendations outlined in the report dated February 18, 2026 from the Commissioner of Planning and Building, that concludes that the proposed official plan and rezoning are not acceptable from a planning perspective and should not be approved.' Council approved it on the consent agenda on April 1 2026. The February 18 2026 report itself (escribe DocumentId 83342) returned HTTP 403 and has not been read. UNIT COUNT REMOVED 2026-08-11: this entry published "1,043 units", and re-reading every source against the claim found that figure in NONE of them — not the City application page, not the statutory public meeting notice (which carries no unit count at all), not the INsauga article. It is in the City's committee and council minutes added as sources on 2026-10-02 ('1,043 apartment units', PDC May 26 2025; '1,043 dwelling units', PDC March 9 2026 and Council April 1 2026), which were not among this entry's sources when it was removed. It is removed rather than re-attributed, and the storey counts, which the City page and the notice both state, are what remains.
Developments
The City published notice that council intends to designate two Streetsville properties — 20 Thomas Street and 42 Queen Street South — as of cultural heritage value under section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act. Council's intention is dated July 29, 2026; the notices issued August 4, and any objection must reach the City Clerk by 4:30 p.m. on September 3, 2026, seven weeks before the election. Both properties are tied to Streetsville's Graydon builders: 20 Thomas Street, a two-storey Edwardian-era brick building, was built in approximately 1908 by Joseph Phair, a foreman for the builder John Graydon; Phair is credited with having constructed, and provided input on, many buildings in Streetsville; 42 Queen Street South is associated with William and John Graydon themselves, to whose family a number of the surviving 19th-century buildings are credited. WHAT THIS IS NOT: a response to the tower proposals. The same council meeting produced notices of intention for seven designations across four wards — Wards 1, 2, 6 and 11 — so this is a city-wide heritage action that happens to include two Streetsville properties, and nothing in the City's notices connects it to the appealed application. WHAT MAKES IT RELEVANT ANYWAY is the instrument. A Heritage Conservation District Plan governs a defined area under Part V of the Act, and this ward's central problem is that the 18- and 22-storey tower proposal sits outside that boundary. Individual designation under Part IV works property by property and does not depend on the District boundary at all. It is the tool that reaches individual properties the Plan does not, and as of July 29, 2026 council has started it for two properties in this ward; each by-law designates only the property its notice names. 20 Thomas Street is on the same street as the 64 and 66 Thomas Street application that the City's page marks Appealed, though the City's notice makes no reference to it.