Since 2010, the community of Sitio San Roque in Quezon City, Metro Manila, has faced recurring threats of eviction. For over a decade, the urban poor people’s organization KADAMAY San Roque has been at the forefront of asserting residents’ housing rights. These sustained efforts culminated in a community-led counterproposal, which opened dialogues with the Quezon City Local Government Unit (LGU) on a prospective in-city, vertical (high-rise), rental social housing project. While the project offers hope that residents’ everyday lives may improve, this hope is tempered by uncertainty. The vertical housing typology raises anxieties of disrupting their everyday lives - how residents work, move, care for one another, and organize politically. Meanwhile, the lack of clear project details and limited engagement with KADAMAY San Roque further add to these anxieties. Together, these uncertainties leave residents unsure whether the new housing will ultimately improve or worsen their everyday lives. This paper examines the perspectives of urban poor residents in Sitio San Roque, focusing on their concerns about the proposed vertical social housing project and the proposals they articulated in response. Informed by the dimensions of everyday (city) life framework, the paper identifies eight key areas of concern regarding the proposed vertical social housing project: (1) Housing affordability, tenure, and eligibility; (2) Livelihood and location; (3) Basic social services and utilities; (4) Safety and access; (5) Housing unit livability and personalization; (6) Post-occupancy management; (7) Continuity of mutual support systems, political organizing, and autonomy; and (8) Participation. These concerns extend beyond the housing itself, encompassing related dimensions of everyday life such as employment (jobs and livelihoods), movement (transport), and social reproduction, including political organizing and engagement. The paper argues that social housing - especially in vertical typologies - must address these interconnected dimensions rather than focusing solely on housing provision; and that genuine people’s participation is essential to making the co-creation of social housing development sustainable for residents.