Decoding Asset Trends: Construction, Additions, & Sizes Over Time for the City of Thunder Bay
In this blog post, we delve into the intricate patterns of asset construction and additions over time, along with the evolution of average asset size. We explore these dimensions using a dataset of tax-supported facilities for the City of Thunder Bay, offering a multifaceted perspective on infrastructure development and planning.
Our first visualization, "Asset Construction and Additions Over Time (Grouped by Decades)", represents the lifecycle of assets. The sky-blue bars demonstrate the number of assets constructed in each decade, providing a chronological glance at infrastructural growth. The salmon-coloured bars depict the number of additions made to existing assets, enriching our understanding of facility expansion or upgrades. This combined visualization offers a comprehensive view of the construction and expansion patterns, empowering us to visualize the ebb and flow of infrastructural growth influenced by economic conditions, population growth, and shifting governmental policies.
Transitioning from the quantity to the quality of assets, our second visualization, "Average Size of Constructed Assets Over Time (Grouped by Decades)", maps the evolution of the average size of assets constructed each decade. The green line graph with diamond markers provides a clear trajectory of how the typical size of constructed assets has varied over the decades.
From the two visualizations, we can draw several conclusions regarding the trends in asset construction, additions, and sizes:
1. Asset Construction and Additions Over Time: The first graph reveals that the number of assets constructed and additions made to existing assets fluctuate over time.
There are periods with a high rate of construction and additions, likely corresponding to times of economic prosperity or population growth when more facilities might have been needed.
On the other hand, there are periods with lower construction and addition rates, possibly due to economic downturns, policy changes, or shifts in community needs.
It's important to note that the number of additions generally tracks with the number of constructions, suggesting that as more assets are built, more additions are made to existing assets as well. This could be due to increased demand for facility expansions or upgrades as communities grow and develop.
2. Average Size of Constructed Assets Over Time: The second graph shows that the average size of the constructed assets also changes over time.
The average size of the assets does not show a consistent trend, indicating that it's influenced by various factors. These could include the type and purpose of the facilities being built, available funding, land use policies, and changing community needs.
Some decades show an increase in the average size, suggesting a trend towards building larger facilities during these periods. This could be due to a need for larger facilities to accommodate growing populations or expanding services.
Other decades show a decrease in the average size, indicating a shift towards smaller facilities. This could reflect a focus on more localized services, budget constraints, or changes in land use policies.
In conclusion, the visualizations reveal that the trends in asset construction, additions, and sizes are influenced by a complex interplay of factors, including economic conditions, population growth, community needs, and policy changes. Understanding these trends can provide valuable insights for policymakers, city planners, and other stakeholders involved in infrastructure development and planning.