With the approaching municipal elections in Kingston this October, many candidates have discussed both the city’s housing crisis and sustainability issues. Yet rarely are these issues discussed together, despite their connection.
Housing and environmental policy are often discussed as separate issues in Kingston and beyond, particularly within political platforms. In reality, the two should not be treated as separate issues, as they are fundamentally interrelated.
Because Kingston is one of Canada’s most expensive housing markets, I understand why the issue is so prevalent in local politics. But the consequences of Kingston’s housing shortage extend beyond affordability and neighbourhood stability.
As rent prices increase, students who can’t afford rental units closer to campus may have to look farther away from the university for somewhere they can actually afford.
According to a 2020 project course study, the University generates roughly 29,300 trips per day, with 42 per cent of trips to campus made by walking and 19 per cent by transit. If affordable housing becomes spread out farther from campus, students have fewer opportunities to walk or cycle to campus and will become more reliant on transit or cars.
I experienced this myself. When I was looking for a home during my first year, the only affordable options were about a 20-minute walk from campus. While I make that walk most days, if I am in a hurry, I’ll take transit instead. A 20-minute walk is manageable, but if that distance becomes any longer, walking becomes less possible.
This is why Kingston’s housing crisis cannot be separated from its environmental goals.
There is a common assumption that more housing and development is inherently worse for the environment, but development itself is not necessarily environmentally harmful. Where and how it’s built is what really matters.
Focusing on mixed zoning housing and developing denser, more affordable housing units near campus, grocery stores, and other essential amenities will make sustainable transportation more accessible. Housing affordability and environmental sustainability do not have to be competing priorities, they support one another.
Yet when I spoke with candidates about the largest environmental issue facing Kingston, some mentioned protecting the city’s trees and improving greener transportation but did not directly connect sustainability to housing.
That needs to change.
If Kingston wants to reduce car dependency and build a more sustainable city, it needs to take action to prevent residents from being pushed away from sustainable transportation options.
This is not to say the city has not taken steps toward a greener Kingston, or that candidates do not care about the city’s environment. Many candidates have proven to be passionate about sustainability. However, the issues are discussed separately, with separate solutions.
It’s time politicians recognize that these problems are interconnected.
Queen’s has a responsibility in this as well. As one of Kingston’s largest institutions and a major contributor to the city’s student population, the University’s housing decisions affect the broader community and environment. Building more student housing should not only be about increasing the number of available beds. Where that housing is built matters too.
Housing policy is environmental policy. They should not be approached separately.
Lola Hustins is a second-year Philosophy student and one of The Journal’s Assistant News Editors.
Tags
Environment, housing, mixed zoning housing, sustainable cities
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to eic@queensjournal.ca.