Halifax Population & Growth

[someone123]

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

For a magazine/blog that caters to queer folk, then I think it'd be safe to say many of the readers would be most interested in downtown and downtown adjacent neighbourhoods which happen to be very walkable.

This is true but they leaned into "small" a lot more than "walkable". Manhattan is just as walkable but not small. Some suburbs are small but not walkable.

One change in the city, I think, is that there is more to see in the neighbourhoods than in the past, places like Bar Kismet, Almonak, or The Narrows. Then at the other end, Barrington South is growing. Either these aren't downtown or they are downtown and downtown's not really all that compact, objectively, in the sense of attractions being an easy walk away from each other. I think this will just get more and more pronounced over time as there is more development around these areas, like all the construction around Almon Street.

[Empire]

This youtube video is very interesting in terms of how NYC managed density and building styles. Note at the 9:31 mark how similar this building is to the Dennis building.

Ref youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RL7BECNn-RI

[someone123]

This was already posted elsewhere but Statistics Canada estimated NS grew by 21,273 from Q2 2021 to Q2 2022. This might be the largest annual jump ever in NS by a large margin.

I wonder what the consequences of this are for Halifax demography. I think NS as a whole is growing more, but a large share of that likely went to Halifax, and the growth may be higher during this past year than in previous years.

You can see the quarterly provincial estimates here: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901
Metro estimates here: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710013501

The 2021 Halifax estimate is 460,274 but this is using the 2016 census boundaries. With the 2021 boundaries the Halifax CMA added East Hants (22,892 census count) and Indian Brook 14 (2,739 census count). With an undercount correction that yields roughly 486,000 as the 2021 boundary population. With a 21,000 gain in NS, it's possible that Halifax is already around 500,000 or will pass it in 2022 sometime.

[q12]

Originally Posted by someone123

This was already posted elsewhere but Statistics Canada estimated NS grew by 21,273 from Q2 2021 to Q2 2022. This might be the largest jump ever by a large margin.

I wonder what the consequences of this are for Halifax demography. I think NS as a whole is growing more, but a large share of that likely went to Halifax, and the growth may be higher during this past year than in previous years.

You can see the quarterly provincial estimates here: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901
Metro estimates here: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710013501

The 2021 Halifax estimate is 460,274 but this is using the 2016 census boundaries. With the 2021 boundaries the Halifax CMA added East Hants (22,892 census count) and Indian Brook 14 (2,739 census count). With an undercount correction that yields roughly 486,000 as the 2021 boundary population. With a 21,000 gain in NS, it's possible that Halifax is already around 500,000 or will pass it in 2022 sometime.

Yeah I would guess July 1st, 2022 Halifax CMA estimate was at or very near 500,000 and is likely to exceed 500,000 any day now.

Now the question is can Halifax hit 1,000,000 by 2050 or earlier (with the province aiming for 2,000,000 by 2060)?

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by someone123

I wonder what the consequences of this are for Halifax demography. I think NS as a whole is growing more, but a large share of that likely went to Halifax, and the growth may be higher during this past year than in previous years.

Because new construction has not kept up with housing demand, the consequence is basically gentrification at the city/metro scale - a more attractive, higher-amenity city with universally higher costs, especially in areas with transit service. There is quite a bit of new (relative) wealth coming in, but many households are just worse off or have more people crammed in per unit to cut down on costs. Homelessness continues to be a huge and growing problem.

One issue is that everything is more expensive but another is that there just aren't enough units available at any given time. I think thousands of students are going to be unable to find housing this fall. Meanwhile there are hundreds or thousands of Ukrainian refugees trying to move here to work construction jobs but there's nowhere for them to live, regardless of how much they're willing to pay.

It'll be interesting to see whether the current round of construction ends up making much of a difference. It all feels very slow compared to what's really needed.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Hali87

It'll be interesting to see whether the current round of construction ends up making much of a difference. It all feels very slow compared to what's really needed.

Construction is slow compared to the shifts in migration. Then again there is elasticity in the housing supply. As an example, a homeowner might not bother to rent out a basement at all for $800 a month but they might do it for $1200 a month. In Vancouver there are a lot more people living in non-standard accommodations or with larger numbers of roommates and if you applied the same standards to Halifax it would mean tens of thousands more spaces in housing, but lower quality on average.

I wonder how much the municipality, province, and federal government have shifted their views on the city and what its future needs might look like. HRM definitely had a "kick the can down the road" attitude in the past. The rapid transit plan seems to follow the pattern.

[Keith P.]

I find it inordinately frustrating how the HRM govt diverts attention and resources to what seem to be mostly symbolic things, some of which do not cost much, some of which cost a lot, but which all take resources and attention away from the big issues. Just in the last few days we've seen things like the botched SGR transit-only plan; tody's rollout of bike lane plans which really seem to be only targeted towards the university student body who cycle; and also today, a "diversity" initiative announcing the replacement of all stop signs over some period of time with bilingual ones. Today we were also promised yet again some version of an electronic fare capability for transit, sometime around 12-14 months from now. One wonders how they can botch this one more time. Even if it works, we still have a largely ineffective transit system and no bigger-picture solutions for the population tsunami everyone now seems to think is coming.

[Empire]

City resources are urgently needed to address housing, infrastructure and transit woes. I noticed today, crews removing the curb bump outs on Maple St. in Dartmouth. These bump outs are approx. one year old and now resources are being used to remove them. I agree with the removal as I opposed the installation. The bump outs are dangerous for cyclists as there is very limited space for a car to pass a bicycle that is adjacent a bump out. Multiple tire marks and broken concrete on the bump outs indicate vehicles had been hitting them on a regular basis. Seems as though HRM views the bump outs a hazard as they have hazard signs marking their intrusion into the street.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by Empire

City resources are urgently needed to address housing, infrastructure and transit woes. I noticed today, crews removing the curb bump outs on Maple St. in Dartmouth. These bump outs are approx. one year old and now resources are being used to remove them. I agree with the removal as I opposed the installation. The bump outs are dangerous for cyclists as there is very limited space for a car to pass a bicycle that is adjacent a bump out. Multiple tire marks and broken concrete on the bump outs indicate vehicles had been hitting them on a regular basis. Seems as though HRM views the bump outs a hazard as they have hazard signs marking their intrusion into the street.

Hate to burst your bubble but the curb extensions are becoming permanent with the Dahlia Street AT project. The east side curb north and south of the intersection will be extended to shorten the street crossing.

I won't post my opinions on the tactical improvement projects like this since this is the wrong thread.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Hate to burst your bubble but the curb extensions are becoming permanent with the Dahlia Street AT project. The east side curb north and south of the intersection will be extended to shorten the street crossing.

This is why city councillors *cough*SamAustin*cough* should be kept far far away from the designers of traffic management infrastructure and not permitted to impose their will on construction plans.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Hate to burst your bubble but the curb extensions are becoming permanent with the Dahlia Street AT project. The east side curb north and south of the intersection will be extended to shorten the street crossing.

I won't post my opinions on the tactical improvement projects like this since this is the wrong thread.

But this isn't a good look:

Originally Posted by Empire

The bump outs are dangerous for cyclists as there is very limited space for a car to pass a bicycle that is adjacent a bump out. Multiple tire marks and broken concrete on the bump outs indicate vehicles had been hitting them on a regular basis.

I feel qualified to comment as I grew up in that neighborhood, and unless something has changed, Maple Street has long been a major commuter route. I get that some lesser-used side streets are good uses for bicycle-friendly, traffic calming measures, but it seems counterintuitive (to me) to put this on a busy commuter route.

Seems there really should be more thought put into the process than there is.

[bartekci]

Originally Posted by Empire

City resources are urgently needed to address housing, infrastructure and transit woes. I noticed today, crews removing the curb bump outs on Maple St. in Dartmouth. These bump outs are approx. one year old and now resources are being used to remove them. I agree with the removal as I opposed the installation. The bump outs are dangerous for cyclists as there is very limited space for a car to pass a bicycle that is adjacent a bump out. Multiple tire marks and broken concrete on the bump outs indicate vehicles had been hitting them on a regular basis. Seems as though HRM views the bump outs a hazard as they have hazard signs marking their intrusion into the street.

I am beginning to wonder how much this is a reflection of NS drivers than city planning failing. Bumpouts seem to be a common mechanism across the world to promote slower speeds, but somehow we can't make them work?

Perhaps Maple St. has a particular problem that makes bumpout implementations a poor choice.

Edit: I see further replies highlighting Maple St. as a commuter route.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by fatscat

I am beginning to wonder how much this is a reflection of NS drivers than city planning failing. Bumpouts seem to be a common mechanism across the world to promote slower speeds, but somehow we can't make them work?

Perhaps Maple St. has a particular problem that makes bumpout implementations a poor choice.

Edit: I see further replies highlighting Maple St. as a commuter route.

It is a busy route to get from the Macdonald bridge to outlying areas of Dartmouth since neither the city nor the provincial govts saw fit to build a proper connection to the road network over the last 60 years. Amazing but not surprising.

Here is the first recorded victim of the Maple St bumpouts. There were later full rollovers but although I remember seeing pictures of those incidents I did not save them.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

But this isn't a good look:



I feel qualified to comment as I grew up in that neighborhood, and unless something has changed, Maple Street has long been a major commuter route. I get that some lesser-used side streets are good uses for bicycle-friendly, traffic calming measures, but it seems counterintuitive (to me) to put this on a busy commuter route.

Seems there really should be more thought put into the process than there is.

I too grew up (and continue to live) in the area.

Maple is a very busy connector and has been since the opening of the Macdonald Bridge, while also being smack in the middle of a long-established residential neighborhood. As Keith has noted, successive councils (City of Dartmouth and then HRM) apparently have never bothered to turn their minds to that traffic flow and to planning possible alternative routes as the cities have grown.

It was both foreseeable and actually foreseen by most - with the notable exception of council - that curb extensions on Maple were a terrible idea and bound to cause problems. It's maddening.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Saul Goode

I too grew up (and continue to live) in the area.

Maple is a very busy connector and has been since the opening of the Macdonald Bridge, while also being smack in the middle of a long-established residential neighborhood. As Keith has noted, successive councils (City of Dartmouth and then HRM) apparently have never bothered to turn their minds to that traffic flow and to planning possible alternative routes as the cities have grown.

It was both foreseeable and actually foreseen by most - with the notable exception of council the councillor for the area - that curb extensions on Maple were a terrible idea and bound to cause problems. It's maddening.

Fixed that for you.

Back in the early to mid-'60s of course there was a proposal from the Province to build a proper connector from the area near what is now the Hwy 111/118 interchange to the School St/Nantucket Ave/Victoria Rd intersection. At the time it would have only affected the houses on one block of School St but would have taken out several holes on Brightwood Golf Club. Back then there was little development east of Brightwood so a land swap allowing them to replace the holes affected could have been done. But the Dartmouth Royalty at the time fiercely opposed it and of course nothing was done, leaving the residents on Maple, Thistle and Woodland to cope with what has become heavy traffic for 6 decades.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Fixed that for you.

While I know what (whom?) you're getting at, I intentionally used the plural because I don't recall any other of our intrepid councillors opposing the lunacy.

Back then there was little development east of Brightwood.

There was actually quite a bit of long-established residential development along the Crichton Avenue corridor at that point. But the area immediately north of that and east of Brightwood) was just about to make a few well-connected people quite a bit richer with the rapid development of Crichton Park. I suspect that was primarily why the Dartmouth establishment was opposed to any expansion of the course in that direction.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Saul Goode

While I know what (whom?) you're getting at, I intentionally used the plural because I don't recall any other of our intrepid councillors opposing the lunacy.

The groupthink on Council is strong. Nobody wants to rock the progressive boat.

There was actually quite a bit of long-established residential development along the Crichton Avenue corridor at that point. But the area immediately north of that and east of Brightwood) was just about to make a few well-connected people quite a bit richer with the rapid development of Crichton Park. I suspect that was primarily why the Dartmouth establishment was opposed to any expansion of the course in that direction.

Yes, that is exactly correct. I actually saw the conceptual map many years ago and do not recall it in detail now, but from what I can remember it affected 4 or 5 holes. The main problem was that it came close to both St Andrew's church on one side and the Brightwood clubhouse on the other, although I believe the "new" clubhouse was only in the planning stage at that point so it would be less of an issue. But holes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 tee, 7 green and 8 tee would likely have been wiped out unless houses along Thistle St were expropriated. OTOH several of those holes are weak and could have been replaced with better ones if the land swap occurred. But that is all ancient history now. I sometimes wonder why property owners along Woodland have not tried a class-action lawsuit against HRM and the province for reducing the value and enjoyment of their properties by inflicting such heavy traffic upon them for many decades.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I sometimes wonder why property owners along Woodland have not tried a class-action lawsuit against HRM and the province for reducing the value and enjoyment of their properties by inflicting such heavy traffic upon them for many decades.

It's odd how that seems to bother some people far more than others. And it's not as if there was no political influence in that area. Gloria McCluskey (extremely active Brightwood member) lived on Victoria Road, just south of the Woodland intersection, for many decades (perhaps she still does; I'm not sure), smack in the middle of all that non-stop traffic and noise madness. And as an appraiser and former Dartmouth city assessor, she knows a lot about property values. And Danny Brownlow lived on the corner of Woodland and Ryland (or was it Laurier?) for ages. Two former councillors and mayors. Makes one wonder.

[q12]

As of November 1st, 2022 the Statistics Canada population clock has Nova Scotia estimated at 1,029,172.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2018005-eng.htm

The new Halifax Census Metropolitan area (CMA) is approximately ~48.5%* of Nova Scotia's population. This would mean the Halifax CMA is likely passing 500,000 either in November or December of 2022.

*48.5 is likely a conservative estimate, the real percentage once new population estimates for CMAs are released in 2023 will likely have it closer to 50%

[someone123]

A lot of people have no clue what the population numbers are but some people do build narratives around them.

As an example NS is sometimes still presented as a "minor province" (synonymous with Atlantic) while SK/MB are not. NS is closer in population to SK than NB.

As another example a lot of people from elsewhere tend to group Halifax in with smaller rather than larger cities. For example on SSP you are likely to see comparisons between Halifax and cities under 300k but people will object if you compare it to one over 800k without adding some kind of caveat about how it can't really be the same due to the population difference.

A while back I read a comment by somebody from Halifax who visited Quebec City and said he was finally in a "real city". While Quebec City has more heritage buildings, and I think most heritage buildings are nicer than most new buildings, I wonder how much bigger and busier the urban core is these days or will be after another 10 years. I wonder if a neutral visitor with no prior knowledge of either town (cruise ship visitor from NY) would notice a size difference these days.