Across North America, cities are confronting a housing crisis that demands urgent, innovative responses. In Toronto, the launch of the Rapid Housing Initiative (RHI) in April 2020 marked a pivotal moment—an accelerated effort at the height of the pandemic to deliver safe, stable housing. Since then, unprecedented investments have been made in communities across Ontario to address housing insecurity, reshaping the province’s residential landscape.
What’s emerging is a new typology: supportive housing. With integrated support and purpose-built from the ground up—rather than retrofitting existing structures—these housing developments are designed to accommodate a wide range of needs and are operated within a strict funding and regulatory framework. Now in its third phase, designers are reflecting on how RHI has progressed since its inception, and where it must go next to ensure these new communities are sustainable over the long term.
Urgency and innovation
The genesis of RHI was rooted in crisis. Launched at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the program was a direct response to an urgent and growing need for housing among the city’s most vulnerable residents. The objective was clear: act fast.
RHI’s phase 1 embodied this urgency. With a mandate to add more living spaces as quickly and cheaply as possible, the city turned to volumetric modular design to deliver affordable units on an accelerated timeline. Guided by the principles of Housing First, these early efforts prioritized the creation of safe, stable environments for the tenants who would eventually occupy them.
The tight timelines and modular approach left little room for refinements or to reshape the interior layouts, but the resulting structures served their purpose. Importantly, there was a recognition—both architectural and philosophical—that these were not temporary shelters but rather permanent fixtures of their neighborhoods. This awareness informed early design decisions, which sought to balance speed with dignity and to challenge the stigma often associated with supportive housing through the careful integration of context and community.
Evolving intentionality
As the city emerged from the pandemic, the pace of these projects eased, and RHI began to evolve into a more collaborative process. Phase 2 reflected greater intentionality, influenced by insights from public health, social work, community development, and a growing understanding of the complex needs of residents. While the first projects were reactive, the second wave was more proactive—leaning into past experiences and embedding feedback loops into the design and delivery process.
These projects saw more deliberate community engagement, refined programming, and improved implementation strategies. While still working within the modular system, the design focus broadened to include communal spaces that could nurture social connection and reinforce the commitment to both housing and support. The emphasis was clear as these modular spaces grew in size from one unit to three or four.
Meanwhile, the demand for supportive housing continued to grow, prompting exploration of new sites. Many of these sites, however, were poorly suited to a modular approach. While prefabrication remained central to rapid delivery, it became clear that a more flexible system was needed—one capable of responding to the myriad complexities of both site and program.
Now in phase 3, RHI has matured into a more sophisticated and intentional model. Each prospective site is no longer approached with a one-size-fits-all solution. Instead, the process is now guided by greater expertise, more site-driven solutions, and the early integration of operator feedback in the design process. RHI today reflects a deeper understanding of the technical, functional, and social dimensions of supportive housing.
Responsive design
The latest RHI projects, Wardlaw and Bellevue, continue to leverage prefabrication but through mass timber. This shift caused tradeoffs, including longer design and construction timelines, but the benefits have been significant.
For one, the prefabricated CLT (cross-laminated timber) structures brought renewed precision to the construction. CNC (computer numerical control) fabrication ensured tight tolerances, unlike the hand-built nature of volumetric modules, which required broader tolerances and more onsite adjustments. The result was a building that fit together like LEGO blocks—with cleaner envelopes, fewer site fixes, and better performance. Of course, preplanning was key. With penetrations and rerouting coordinated in advance, the process avoided common site frustrations and kept momentum high.
By relying on mass timber in construction, designers were liberated from the boxy constraints of modules in phases 1 and 2. The shift allowed for more breakout areas, open lounges, commercial kitchens (which double as educational hubs), and more thoughtful unit layouts. Each project is now approached as a unique opportunity to provide affordable housing that can result in a thriving community—with a growing appreciation for the role of design in fostering a resident’s overall sense of autonomy, well-being, and “belonging.”
The shift to mass timber advanced the social sustainability of these buildings and their environmental performance in alignment with the ever-evolving Toronto Green Standard (TGS). Unlike earlier phases that relied on volumetric modular construction, the use of CLT superstructures paired with slab-on-grade foundations has enabled a radically lower-carbon approach. Both Wardlaw and Bellevue are on track to achieve unprecedented embodied carbon targets—18 kg CO₂e/square foot (194 kg/sq m) and 15.7 kg CO₂e/square foot (169 kg/sq m), respectively—approaching a near A++ ranking in the London Energy Transformation Initiative (LETI) benchmarks. Wardlaw also features wood siding, further reducing its carbon footprint.
In addition to mass timber, the buildings feature all-electric systems, such as commercial kitchens, and include enhanced construction waste management, rigorous air-tightness testing, and new irrigation strategies, helping push the TGS further. They have also become proving grounds for evaluating the benefits of two new initiatives.
At Wardlaw, the city is piloting a deconstruction strategy to further reduce embodied carbon. The site, previously occupied by two identical postwar homes, offered a unique opportunity to compare deconstruction with standard demolition. A “deconstructor” was engaged to carefully salvage materials and fixtures—lights, kitchens, wood flooring—for resale. Drywall was removed for recycling. Old-growth lumber was denailed and milled for reuse in landscape features and fencing. Brick and granite were also cleaned and stored for future use. Only after all salvageable materials were removed did demolition proceed. While the full carbon savings are still being calculated, the reuse of materials significantly reduced the volume of waste and preserved pieces of the site’s history.
Meanwhile, the Bellevue team is testing bifacial solar panels. With a vertical orientation, bifacial panels generate electricity from both sides of the panel—front and back—by capturing direct sunlight as well as reflected and diffused light from surrounding surfaces. Unlike conventional solar panels, these two-way panels are less prone to overheat and thus are able to maintain their electrical output even on especially hot days. They also integrate seamlessly with the building’s extensive green roof, avoiding shading and allowing rainwater to reach vegetation. And unlike traditional inclined panels, bifacial ones shed snow and ice more effectively, increasing their durability and improving year-round performance.
In the sum of its improvements, the evolution of RHI is a testament to the power of iteration. What began as a rapid response to a crisis has become a deliberate, experience-driven model for creating quick, affordable housing. Moreover, the lessons of RHI offer a roadmap for cities seeking to meet urgent housing needs while advancing quality, community, and sustainability.
Looking ahead
As RHI continues to evolve, it is imperative that policymakers, designers, and developers continue to push its potential further. While municipalities are mandated to provide housing, the intersection with mental health—often governed by separate funding streams and policy frameworks—remains a critical gap. The future of this housing typology must grapple with how to meet an increasingly diverse range of needs within a single building, and how to embed mental health supports as a foundational, not peripheral, element. This imperative calls for continued experimentation, cross-sector collaboration, and a willingness to challenge conventional boundaries.
Affordable, supportive housing is no longer a stopgap—it is a vital part of the housing continuum. Its success, however, depends on sustained reflection and engagement with those who operate and inhabit these spaces. Listening to tenants, operators, and community stakeholders can help identify pathways to improvement and innovation. In its capacity for rapid prototyping, RHI has and continues to offer an opportunity to refine the model and to ensure that these buildings not only house people but help them thrive.
