I. Loading Data: Shapefiles for ward boundaries and CSV files for healthcare services (long-term care, pharmacies, bus stops, and health facilities) were loaded into GeoDataFrames using geopandas.
II. Data Standardization: Column names were standardized across all datasets to maintain consistency and avoid processing errors.
III. Spatial Joins: The facility and service datasets were spatially joined with ward geometries, assigning each facility to its respective ward. This enabled a spatial understanding of the service distribution.
IV. Area Calculation: Ward areas were computed in square kilometers to facilitate the calculation of facility density.

• Classification: Natural Breaks (Jenks) classification was applied using the mapclassify library to categorize combined facility densities into distinct groups. This classification method helped highlight disparities in facility access across wards.
• Visualization: Data visualization was conducted using matplotlib and contextily to generate both bar charts and geographic maps. These visualizations illustrated facility density, accessibility rates, and ward-specific characteristics, allowing for an in-depth comparison of the availability of services for seniors across Hamilton.

• Data Analysis: pandas and geopandas for data manipulation.
• Spatial Joins: Conducted using geopandas to merge ward data with facilities and services.
• Network Analysis: osmnx and networkx for analyzing the street network and calculating shortest paths.
• Proximity Calculations: scipy.spatial for nearest-neighbor search via KD-Tree.
• Classification: Natural Breaks (Jenks) using mapclassify to classify facility densities.
• Data Visualization: matplotlib for plotting maps and charts, with contextily used for basemap integration.

Analysis

Mapping Senior Renters and Vulnerable Wards

This step combines the visualization of senior renters' distribution and their socioeconomic vulnerability across Hamilton, presenting a cohesive analysis of the challenges they face. By integrating data on senior population density, renter occupancy, and vulnerability scores, we gain a clearer understanding of how housing unaffordability and displacement affect low-income senior renters.
1. Senior Renters' Distribution:
Figure 2: Percentage of the population aged over 65 and over in Hamilton CMA, in 2021 (source: Statistis Canada, Census of Population 2021, Hamilton CMA)

Statistics Canada' 2021 census data (Figure 2), it maps the percentage of residents aged 65 and over across the Hamilton Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) at the census tract level. Although the map includes areas beyond the Hamilton Census Division (CD), such as Burlington and Grimsby, it offers valuable insights into the spatial distribution of seniors. The data reveals distinct patterns:

I. High concentrations (≥21%) of seniors are primarily located in the west and south of the Hamilton urban core.
II. Moderate concentrations (17% to < 21%) form a transitional zone around the edges of the urban core, separating the densest senior populations in outer areas from younger demographics in the city center.
III. Lower concentrations (< 17%) are found in central urban areas, particularly around the downtown core and adjacent neighborhoods.

This urban-rural divide suggests that seniors are increasingly moving away from the city center, possibly due to affordability pressures or a preference for less densely populated suburban or rural areas. A comparison map (Figure 3) of senior distribution maps from 2016 to 2021 highlights this trend, showing a noticeable shift of senior populations toward peripheral areas over five years. Figure 3: Comparison of Senior Distribution of 2016 and 2021 in Hamilton CD (source: City of Hamilton Open Data Portal, Census Data, 2016 and 2021)
2. Renter Occupancy and Housing Demands
Since detailed rental market data by age group is unavailable, this step's analysis base on renter occupancy rates to approximate rising rental housing demands. Comparing renter distribution maps (Figure 4) from 2016 and 2021 shows a significant increase in tenant occupancy, particularly in peripheral wards. In 2021, the highest tenant occupancy range (55.21%–76.6%) surpassed the highest range in 2016 (32.31%–76.4%). This increase suggests a growing demand for rental housing, likely driven by migration to peripheral wards. Figure 4: Comparison of Renter Distribution of 2016 and 2021 in Hamilton CD (source: City of Hamilton Open Data Portal, Housing Tenure, 2016 and 2021)
3. Vulnerability Scores
To assess the socioeconomic vulnerability of seniors across Hamilton’s 15 wards, the weighted scores is calculated by using the following indicators:

I. Senior Low-Income Measure (LIM) Rate (40%)
II. Tenant Unaffordability (20%)
III. Senior Population Distribution (20%)
IV. Renter Occupancy (20%)

The vulnerability score for Hamilton’s wards increased from 84.7% in 2016 to 89.5% in 2021 (Figure 5), indicating growing challenges for low-income senior renters. Vulnerability has shifted from the city center to peripheral areas, aligning with trends in senior migration and rising rental demand. Figure 5: Comparison of Vulnerable Score of 2016 and 2021 in Hamilton CD
4. Housing Affordability and Unaffordability Trends
Figure 6: Hamilton CMA Zone Distribution 2020 (source: Rental Market Report - Hamilton CMA - Date Releases - 2020)
Chart 1: Comparison of Hamilton CMA Rent Prices by Zone 2019 to 2023 (source: CMHC’s Rental Market Survey 2019 and 2023, Hamilton CMA, Private Row (Townhouse) and Apartment Average Rents ($), by Zone and Bedroom Type)
According to CMHC’s Hamilton CMA rental market reports and maps (Figure 6 and Chart 1), rental prices have increased steadily across zones. However, Zone 09 experienced the most dramatic increase, likely due to its larger area and higher prevalence of private row housing, which is costlier than apartments. The unaffordability rate comparison map (Figure 7) from 2016 to 2021 reveals a general improvement across the city:

I. Central wards (1–4) saw a significant decline in unaffordability, from 47.91%–54.50% in 2016 to 38.71%–40.40% in 2021.
II. Intermediate wards (5–7) also experienced a reduction, moving from 42.31%–44.40% in 2016 to 30.91%–35.30% in 2021.
III. Peripheral wards (8–10, 11–15) remained the most affordable, with unaffordability rates dropping from 39.40%–40.40% in 2016 to 28.60%–30.90% in 2021.
IV. However, some peripheral wards, such as Ward 13, saw a slight increase in unaffordability by 2021.

Figure 7: Comparison of Unaffordability Rate of 2016 and 2021 in Hamilton CD (source: City of Hamilton Open Data Portal, Census Income, 2016 and 2021)
5. Implications for Senior Mobility
The observed trends in affordability and vulnerability scores highlight the mobility challenges faced by low-income senior renters in Hamilton:

I. Central Wards: While unaffordability has decreased, central wards remain out of reach for many low-income seniors due to high rental costs relative to fixed incomes.
II. Intermediate Wards: These wards, with a balance between affordability and accessibility, may attract more seniors due to better transit connectivity and healthcare access.
III. Peripheral Wards: Despite being the most affordable, these areas often lack sufficient transit and healthcare infrastructure, creating challenges for seniors reliant on public transportation to access essential services.

These patterns indicate a growing displacement of low-income seniors to peripheral areas, which could lead to overcrowding and strain on limited resources. This step sets the stage for examining how housing market trends and unaffordability exacerbate vulnerabilities, particularly for seniors dependent on transit and healthcare access.

Accessibility to Dementia Care Facilities

The accessibility analysis of dementia care facilities across Hamilton's wards reveals notable disparities, underscoring the uneven provision of healthcare services for elderly residents. Wards 15 and 13 exhibit the highest accessibility to dementia care facilities, suggesting that residents in these wards are in closer proximity to specialized dementia care. However, this advantage is not complemented by the availability of other essential healthcare-related infrastructure.
Figure 8: Bus Stops and Dementia Health Service Point Distribution in Hamilton CD
1. Combined Weighted Facility Density
The combined weighted facility density map (Figure 9), which incorporates the distribution of long-term care facilities, pharmacies, and bus stops with respect to each ward's senior population ratio, provides a comprehensive view of overall service accessibility. Wards 2, 7, 8, and 14 show the highest combined facility density, indicating a concentration of supporting services in central areas. In contrast, Wards 11, 12, 13, and 15 have significantly lower combined facility densities, pointing to a lack of complementary facilities that would support elderly residents in accessing dementia care.
Figure 9: Long-Term Care, Pharmacy, and Bus Stops Distribution by Hamilton CD Wards
2. Individual Facility Density Analysis

Pharmacy Density (Figure 10): The pharmacy density analysis shows Ward 2 with the highest concentration of pharmacies, while suburban Wards 9, 11, 12, 13, and 15 have minimal availability, limiting residents' access to essential medications.

Figure 10: Pharmacy Distribution by Hamilton CD Wards

Bus Stop Density (Figure 11): Similarly, bus stop density is highest in Wards 2, 7, 8, and 14, supporting ease of transit in these areas. In contrast, Wards 9, 11, 12, 13, and 15 have limited public transit options, posing challenges for residents needing transportation to healthcare facilities.

Figure 11: Bus Stops Distribution by Hamilton CD Wards

Long-Term Care Facility Densit (Figure 12): The density of long-term care facilities also varies significantly across wards. Ward 14 has the highest concentration of long-term care facilities, whereas Wards 11, 12, 13, and 15 are underserved in this regard.

Figure 12: Long-Term Care Distribution by Hamilton CD Wards
3. Overall Findings and Recommendations
Overall, the findings emphasize that while Wards 15 and 13 may have better accessibility to dementia care facilities due to the proximity of bus stops, they lack the supporting infrastructure required for effective and convenient access, especially toward their peripheral areas. The combined weighted facility density map highlights the uneven distribution of critical services across Hamilton's wards, creating barriers for elderly residents in accessing necessary care. There is an urgent need for targeted interventions to address these disparities and ensure equitable access to healthcare services, particularly in underserved areas.

To Conclude

The mapping and analysis reveal that while central wards such as Wards 2, 7, 8, and 14 have a higher concentration of essential facilities—pharmacies, bus stops, and long-term care homes—the peripheral wards, including Wards 11, 12, 13, and 15, remain underserved. Seniors displaced to these areas face limited access to pharmacies and healthcare services, compounded by a lack of public transit connectivity. Even in Wards 15 and 13, which have better accessibility to dementia care facilities, the supporting infrastructure is insufficient, particularly in their outer regions. These disparities in facility density and accessibility create significant barriers for vulnerable elderly populations, leaving many socially and economically isolated.
This analysis also underscores the interconnectedness of housing affordability, healthcare access, and public transit infrastructure. Seniors’ mobility and ability to remain engaged in their communities hinge on equitable access to these critical services. The ongoing loss of affordable rental units and the migration of seniors to less accessible areas pose a risk of further widening the gap in healthcare and social support for Hamilton’s aging population.
To address these challenges, targeted policy interventions are essential. These could include increasing investment in public transit infrastructure in underserved wards, incentivizing the development of healthcare facilities and pharmacies in peripheral areas, and prioritizing affordable housing initiatives to allow seniors to remain in centrally located, well-serviced neighborhoods. Additionally, integrating healthcare and transit planning into broader urban development strategies would ensure a more equitable distribution of services for seniors across all wards.

Citation

1. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2019 & 2023). Rental market survey: Hamilton CMA, private row (townhouse) and apartment average rents ($), by zone and bedroom type.
2. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2020). Rental market report: Hamilton CMA.
3. City of Hamilton. (2016 & 2021). Census data. City of Hamilton Open Data Portal.
4. City of Hamilton. (2016 & 2021). Census income data. City of Hamilton Open Data Portal.
5. Government of Canada. (2024). HSR bus stops. Open Hamilton.
6. Government of Canada. (2020). Rental market Hamilton CMA, 2020. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
7. Ministry of Health. (2023). Service provider locations. Ontario Geohub.
8. Statistics Canada. (2016 & 2021). Census profile, 2021 Census of population: Hamilton, census division (CDR), Ontario. Government of Canada.