Sudbury’s City Council discussed a range of options to respond to homelessness during its July 15 meeting and decided against adding tiny homes to its continuum of housing options.
I took note of how CBC’s Sudbury bureau reported Sudbury’s General Manager of Community Well-being Tyler Campbell as indicating that ‘cities like Hamilton are phasing out tiny homes.’
Having reviewed the debate, the comment was that Hamilton is now trying to determine how it will eventually phase out the “temporary” Barton/Tiffany tiny shelter project.
The City of Hamilton built the “temporary” tiny shelters without having a plan for how and when they will be closed.
(For example, will the Barton/Tiffany residents be prioritized for rent-geared-to-income housing over individuals who’ve been waiting for years on the access to housing waiting list?)
Content
Campbell noted that building tiny home communities is challenging. He cited Hamilton’s procurement fiasco. The original project capital budget was $2.8-million. Hamilton spent $7.9-million.
The primary cause of Hamilton’s failure was the decision to give a sole-source non-competitive contract to a newly incorporated company with no experience providing tiny shelters.
The City of Hamilton decided to hire Microshelters Inc because the company self-identified as being Indigenous-owned. The City hoped to purchase “awards” as the first municipality to use an Indigenous company to purchase tiny shelters.
Microshelters Inc. is now being sued by experienced tiny shelter provider Foldum for allegedly stealing Foldum’s intellectual property.
Microshelters purchased the shelters from a Chinese manufacturer. Due to Microshelters lack of expertise, the City of Hamilton decided on responsibility for shipping, duties, and taxes. Additionally, the shelters had to be modified to meet Ontario’s electrical and building codes.
What Was Said in Sudbury
In summary, Campbell’s remarks were that he cautioned against establishing a municipally-operated tiny homes community because they are costly to build, have similar operating costs as permanent supportive housing, and the structures are temporary.
He recommended that Sudbury focus on projects that are permanent.
He remarked that Hamilton is now beginning to plan for how it will end the Barton/Tiffany project.
“They are, as noted, time-limited in nature.”
“In Hamilton’s case, it was time limited, and they’re looking at what’s the potential exit strategy in the coming years.”
I’ve posted a video copy of the debate here.
Production Details
v. 1.0.0
Published: July 27, 2025
Last updated: July 27, 2025
Author: Joey Coleman
Update Record
v. 1.0.0 original version
I live in the Hamilton area and this is the first I’ve heard that they’re winding it down. There hasn’t been a word out of city hall.
It could have been a good thing and has been done successfully elsewhere, Hamilton totally botched it.
Too bad you turned to Hamilton as an example.
This is correct, City Hall has not shared any information regarding when/how this “temporary” outdoor shelter will end.