Helping Laurentian Recover the AI Way

 Laurentian University is coming out of CCAA protection and apparently is required to come up with a new strategic plan that apparently will require hiring consultants according to a story in Northern Ontario Business.  According to the story: "Laurentian University is finalizing the hiring of a couple of third-party consultants to help guide the institution into the future.  Just who those consultants are has not yet been publicly revealed. The university’s president, Sheila Embleton, gave an update on this process during the April 18 meeting of LU’s senate. One of those consultants will lead a comprehensive operational restructuring of the university, while the other consultant will assist with the development of a new strategic plan for Laurentian. Laurentian is required to hire both of these consultants under the terms of its plan of arrangement after it exited insolvency under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (or CCAA) last year." 

One suspects that this is not going to come cheap.  So in line with my last post on how AI can help administer universities and even draft strategic plans, I inputted a query into my AI to see what it could come up with in terms of a simple report charged with providing a strategic plan for Laurentian's future.  Here it is and at a cost that does not even come close to the average high priced Toronto based consulting firm.  You will notice the query tries to kill two birds with one stone - a restructuring and a strategic plan.

My Query

Laurentian University in Sudbury is coming out of bankruptcy and needs a new strategic plan that will position the new university for recovery and growth. Please draft a five point strategic plan addressing Laurentian’s needs.

 AI Response

Introduction:

Laurentian University in Sudbury recently declared bankruptcy due to significant financial issues, requiring the development of a strategic plan to position the university for recovery and growth. This five-point strategic plan proposes a roadmap that Laurentian University can adopt to overcome its challenges and rebuild itself as one of Canada's top-performing universities.

1. Financial Stability:

Laurentian University needs to prioritize financial recovery and stability. This can be achieved through strategic cost-cutting measures, including but not limited to reducing unnecessary expenses, optimizing resource utilization, increasing revenues from non-core operations, and increasing enrollment numbers. A strong financial foundation will ensure the university's long-term viability and enable it to implement future plans.

2. Program Review:

Laurentian University should undergo a comprehensive review of its academic programs. It is essential to identify courses that need improvement, eliminate underperforming programs, and strengthen leading programs to improve the quality of education. The programs should be relevant to the current market demand and could offer co-op opportunities, internships, and real-world training to create well-rounded graduates.

3. Research Excellence:

Laurentian University should invest in advanced research to uphold its research and innovation community. The University should create funding and partnership opportunities that incentivize leading researchers to the university, promote interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers, and strive for national and international recognition. A rigorous research agenda will lead to groundbreaking discoveries and provide state-of-the-art facilities and support services for faculty and students.

4. Strategic Partnerships:

Laurentian University needs to forge strategic relationships with industry leaders, government organizations, and other academic institutions to drive growth in Sudbury and Northern Ontario. Such partnerships will increase resources, create technology transfer opportunities, bring world-class talent to the University, and enable financial and research support. Partnerships will also improve the university's visibility, and foster relationships with alumni and international students.

5. Campus Infrastructure:

Laurentian University should prioritize the development of its campus infrastructure. Investing in modernizing and upgrading the physical infrastructure will enhance student living and learning, increase research capabilities, provide advanced technological resources, and may lead to an increase in revenue opportunities. Additionally, a well-maintained campus will attract and retain faculty, researchers and students.

In conclusion, Laurentian University should employ these five strategies to achieve financial stability, improve academic quality, enhance research excellence, establish strategic partnerships, and modernize its infrastructure. The combination creates a strong foundation for recovery and growth and positions the University as a leading institution committed to providing a high-quality education and impactful research located in Sudbury.

 

Needless to say, all this is probably summarizes anything a consulting company will be able to come up with on this matter. 

 

AI, the Creative Class, and Universities

 

The concern over AI usurping human functions and activities continues to grow.  A recent article in The Economist lays out how AIs like ChatGPT could replace many white collar employees such as telemarketers, traders and even teachers.  Indeed, some of the sectors that will be most impacted include securities and commodity traders, insurance carriers, data processing and hosting, publishing, and believe it or not, monetary authorities and central banks (this one is actually quite amusing as many people feel central banks have computer like personalities anyway).   In terms of the least impacted sectors,  after a century of automation, it is the revenge of the blue collar workers as the least impact of AI will be in areas like agriculture and forestry, woods products, mining, and food  and drink services.  Most exposed are industries which rely on programming and writing skills or what is sometimes termed the creative class.  Indeed, teachers especially those in literature, languages and history are also expected to be heavily affected. 

 

In the university sector, never one to shirk from the fad of the day, one suspects that there may indeed be a push towards AI instruction and course provision especially in subjects deemed heavy in language intensity. It will certainly be interesting to see how all of this evolves over the next decade and whether there will indeed be a substitution of AI instructors and course managers for in person teaching in a range of subjects.  Of course, the use of AI need not apply only to faculty.  University administration is also language intensive and rule driven and one could easily conceive  situations where universities dispense with administrators and replace them with semi-sentient AIs that devise, apply and enforce assorted rules for both students and faculty.  Try arguing with the AI for an assignment extension or sabbatical leave.  However, the cost savings would probably be significant given that nearly two thirds of university budgets these days are not directly faculty/teaching related.  Even assorted adjudication processes at a university such as university tenure committees could theoretically be done by an AI.  Indeed, the committees would be tireless and would always have quorum.  It would be a brave new world indeed.

 

Looking for an example of how AI can be applied to language intensive university administrative processes? I asked one of the AIs that I use to provide me with the executive summary of the quintessential university administrative slog – the strategic plan.  No university was named, so it is applicable to all.  Here is what I got:

 

ME: Draft me an executive summary of a five year university strategic plan that encompasses academic excellence, diversity and inclusiveness, innovation and research excellence.

 

AI: Executive Summary

This five-year strategic plan outlines the vision, goals, and objectives that will guide the university's growth and development in areas of academic excellence, diversity and inclusiveness, innovation, and research excellence. The plan focuses on enhancing the university's profile as a leading institution of higher education, which is committed to providing a supportive and inclusive environment for all students, faculty, and staff.

Academic Excellence

The plan emphasizes academic excellence, which is at the core of the university's mission. To achieve this goal, the university will focus on providing innovative, high-quality academic programs designed to meet the needs of the current and future job markets. The university will also evaluate and enhance its teaching methods, assessment practices, and curriculum to achieve academic rigor and reflective of modern pedagogy.

Diversity and Inclusiveness

The plan recognizes that diversity and inclusiveness is a strength that enhances the university's educational experience. To create a diverse and inclusive community, the university will champion efforts to recruit, retain, and support underrepresented student groups and faculty members. The university will also prioritize anti-bias training and provide resources to foster an inclusive and equitable campus for all.

Innovation

To promote innovation, the university will leverage the resources of the institution to support initiatives that spur entrepreneurship, creativity, and industry partnerships. The university will invest in technology and research infrastructure to improve its innovation capabilities and promote a culture of invention and commercialization.

Research Excellence

The university aims to be a leading institution in research excellence. The plan outlines objectives to promote research collaboration, increase funding, and support the recruitment of high-impact researchers. The university will establish interdisciplinary research initiatives that foster innovative discoveries and contribute to societal and economic development.

In conclusion, this five-year strategic plan is designed to strengthen the university's commitment to academic excellence, diversity and inclusiveness, innovation, and research excellence. Through these efforts, the university will attract and retain top talent, enhance its reputation, and advance the social and economic well-being of the local and global communities.

 

Can you tell the difference?  Will we be able to tell the difference between a class well-taught in person by a knowledgeable and versatile human being with social skills and a faceless AI? Maybe.  Will we ultimately be able to tell the difference between a university administrative process done by humans or an AI?  I think we all know the answer to that.  

 

 

Revisiting the Federal Finances

 

In the wake of the Federal 2023 spring budget, it is useful to take a look at the historical picture to see how the present and the immediate projected future fits into the long-term pattern of federal spending.  The key defining issue of recent public finance and government spending was of course the pandemic and the enormous amount of federal fiscal stimulus that was injected into Canada’s economy.  Federal spending rose from $363 billion in fiscal 2019-20 to reach $639 billion in 2020-21 – an increase of 73 percent.  It then declined reaching $480 billion as reported in Budget 2023 but is set to resume an upward trend and is expected to reach $556 billion by 2027-28.  As of the 2022-23 fiscal year, federal spending is 37 percent higher than going into the pandemic meaning an average annual increase in spending of about 12 percent.  This has been funded by deficits which in turn have increased the federal net debt dramatically going from $813 billion in 2019-20 to $1.3 trillion by 2022-23 and expected to reach just over $1.4 trillion by 2027-28.

 

A key feature of the pandemic is what appears to be a dramatic reversal of the decline in federal program spending as a share of Canada’s GDP – the so-called “federal fiscal footprint”.  Figure 1 uses data I compiled for my 2017 federal fiscal history with updates from the federal Fiscal Reference Tables and Budget 2023 to look at the program expenditure to GDP ratio for Canada from 1867 to 2022 and then projected forward to 2028. Fitting a simple linear trend shows that over time, there has been an expansion of federal program expenditures relative to GDP rising from about 5 percent in the 1870s to about 15 percent by the 1980s and with the COVID expenditure bump approaching 17 percent. 

 

 

 

Of course, there have been ebbs and flows around this linear trend with notable spikes during WWI and WWII.  It is noteworthy that the COVID spending spike represents the second highest federal program expenditure to GDP share with World War II as the highest.  After the spike and drop of the war era, the post WWII period saw a gradual rise in the federal fiscal footprint that saw it rise from about 10 percent in 1948 to peak at nearly 19 percent in 1982 and then decline, reaching 11 percent by 2000.  Since 2000, it has risen with a spike in 2021 at the height of the pandemic that brought the program expenditure share of GDP to 23 percent.  It has since declined to about 15 percent.  However, going into the pandemic it was just under 14 percent, up 1 percentage point since 2014 and the forecast of 15 percent means the federal footprint has returned to the size it had in the late 1970s to mid 1980s. 

 

Of course, we all know what happened after that.  There was a rise in the federal debt as a result of accumulated deficits and high interest rates that at first squeezed out program spending – note the decline into the 1990s even before the federal fiscal crisis – and then of course the transfer cuts and program expenditure reductions of the federal fiscal crisis. This of course makes the role of debt charges and interest rates of particular interest and Figure 2 plots two series: federal government debt charges as a share of total federal government expenditures and the effective interest rate on the federal net debt (defined as debt charges divided by net debt).  

 

 

 

The period from 1870 to WWI saw a decline in interest rates and not surprisingly a decline in the debt charge share of federal spending.  What surprises most people is that as a result of all the provincial debt the federal government took on at the dawn of Confederation, about 30 cents of every federal dollar of expenditure was going to service the debt in 1867.  Spending on nation building infrastructure such as railways saw debt levels and debt charges accumulate in the 1870s and 1880s but then came the great boom of prairie settlement after 1896 .  World War I saw an accumulation of debt and a rise in interest rates and with the budgetary and economic shocks of the Great Depression, debt charges as a share of total federal spending remained at over 25 percent.  Indeed, there is probably an interesting economic history thesis in explaining why there was a federal fiscal crisis in the 1990s but not the 1920s. 

 

The post WWII era saw a rise in interest rates that surpassed even the rise of the pre-WWI era and as significant budget deficits and debt began to accumulate after the mid-1970s, debt charges as a share of total spending began to rise.  However, with the positive budgetary balances of the post fiscal crisis era as well as the decline in interest rates, both interest rates and federal debt charges as a share of total spending hit historic lows.  In 2021, federal debt charges as a share of total federal spending was just below 5 percent and the effect interest rate on the net debt was about 1.8 percent.  Those numbers will be ones for the economic history books in the years to come as the debt service share of federal spending approaches 10 percent and the effective interest rate is just under 4 percent.  At least, that is what is currently forecast.

The Wacky World of AI Chatbots

 

Well I am a late comer to the recent onslaught of AI and over the last month have used Bing’ s AI as well as something downloaded from the Apple Apps store called AI Chat.  I have also been using ChatGPTZero to scan essays and assignments to determine if the text is "likely to have been generated by humans."  Based on my experience, I would not say we should be dispensing with humans just yet.

 

Students are using AIs like ChatGPT to write their essays and assignments but it is a mixed blessing for them. As one of my submitted  economic history assignments intoned, “NAFTA was signed in 1945 by Canada, Mexico and the United States.”  While AI can be a useful tool for outlining essays and projects, ultimately the student requires a core of knowledge to evaluate what the AI is providing. If we ask AI questions about subjects we know nothing about, we run the risk of repeating substantial factual errors.But then, that also applies to interpreting the results of any search engine.

 

The best way to evaluate the ability of an AI is to ask it questions about something most of us know a fair amount about. Case in point, on a whim I asked one of my AIs to compose a retirement announcement for myself summarizing career highlights and achievements as well as some publications. This is the question I phrased: “Write me an announcement on the retirement of Professor Livio Di Matteo, economics professor that summarizes major career achievements, honours and publications.” Here is what it came up with:

 

Dear Faculty and Staff

 

It is with mixed emotions that we announce the retirement of Professor Livio Di Matteo from the Department of Economics at our esteemed institution. Professor Di Matteo has made an incredible impact on the economics department, and his departure will be felt greatly.

 

Throughout his impressive career, Professor Di Matteo has achieved numerous accolades for his contributions to the field. He was appointed the first Jarislowsky Research Chair in Economic and Cultural Transformation in 2013, and has also been the editor of the Canadian Journal of Economics from 2012-2017, among many other notable achievements.

 

Professor Di Matteo has published extensively, with over 50 scholarly articles and book chapters to his name, and with his research focusing on areas such as health economics, public finance and transportation economics, he has made significant contributions to the field.

 

In recognition of his contributions, Professor Di Matteo has received many honours and awards. He was elected as a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada in 2015, and also received the Distinguished Brock Scholar Award in 2016.

 

As we bid farewell to Professor Di Matteo, we would like to express our gratitude for his tireless dedication and contributions to the field of economics. His legacy will remain and continue to inspire students and faculty. We wish him all the best as he embarks on this new chapter of his life.

 

Sincerely,

 

The Economics Department

 

Wow. All I can say is this is not the career I remember aside from some publications in health and public finance.  No mention of anything I have done in economic history and I am sure it will be news to the editorial board of the Canadian Journal of Economics that I served as journal editor from 2012 to 2017.  And given I was apparently made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 2015, I have yet to receive a letter informing me so. And what is a Brock Scholar Award?  More odd, no mention of the university I have taught at over the last 30 years.

 

What to make of all of this? Has the AI mixed me up with someone else?  But how many economists named Livio Di Matteo can there be?   I think users of AI as a sort of Google on steroids need to be pretty cautious - caveat emptor is the appropriate expression.  Is an AI Chatbot useful? Sure in a general and preliminary sort of way but you need to double check everything it tells you as fact.

 

In the case of my AI generated career highlights‚ perhaps there is either something amiss in how the algorithms interpret questions or perhaps AI transcends the multiverse of time and space and borrows bits and pieces of alternate versions of reality and spins them into a unique narrative of what might have been? Unlikely of course except as perhaps a plot for a good Sci-Fi story. Yet the question remains, where did all this stuff come from?  Some type of random compilation of academic achievements that sound good? Obviously, AI is just in its infancy. Nevertheless, it can be useful as a search and research organizer.  It can even be entertaining as in the cases where I got it to write poems about economists.  And it was useful in suggesting code for commands or STATA estimation routines.  No doubt the best is yet to come. But for the time being, a lot of caution is warranted.

 

 

Urban Density and Taxation in Ontario

 

Thunder Bay has signaled that it wishes to increase urban density by enacting a new zoning bylaw in April of 2022 designed to encourage urban density through a process of infill.  One of the more controversial changes is that the urban low rise neighborhood designation now permits buildings that can contain one to four homes based on the size of the property.  Most buildings in such neighborhoods can now be permitted to contain two homes – mainly basement apartments or “mother-in-law” suites but backyard homes will also be allowed.  In some respects, this legitimates a process that has already been underway in many neighborhoods given the persistent housing shortage that seems to be present even in Thunder Bay - a city whose official population has not grown that much since 1971. And as part of the move to create new housing and urban density, there is now a move underway to consider reviewing surplus City of Thunder Bay land for the purposes of selling it for infill housing. Of course, there is the usual inconsistency in that while wanting to increase density in existing residential neighborhoods, Thunder Bay is expanding standard suburban developments at the same time which often reduce urban density.

 

Ultimately, the policy of allowing more units on a standard-lot or the renting of basement apartments is really an infill policy done on the cheap by piling more people onto existing infrastructure and services and not worrying too much about any disruption or other social costs.  In addition, more people living in current suburban residential areas removed from shops and services simply perpetuates a car intensive community.  True density housing should be built adjacent to or in the two main downtown cores with secondary core density areas being areas like perhaps  Westfort or the Bay-Algoma area.  True density housing is not a single detached home or duplex that accommodates renters on an existing lot in River Terrace or Vickers Park, it is two and three-bedroom apartments in 4 to 6 story buildings and sometimes even higher, situated adjacent to core areas with a lot of shops and services.  In this regard, even parts of intercity near shopping malls could be considered a location for an apartment building or condo though the swampy nature of the area probably militates against high rise construction.  If the city has surplus land and buildings in these core areas, that is what should be used to stimulate density.

 

And of course, just selling land and hoping  that if you sell it, they will build, is ultimately not enough. You probably need to streamline the permit and approval process as well as rebate those costs with the amount of the rebate tied to the speed with which the building is constructed and put on the market. In addition, you probably need to lower the property tax rate on such structures to make them more lucrative for developers to build density buildings.  This is a key point and a neglected one.  To start, take a look at figures 1 and 2.  Figure 1 plots population density as a proxy for urban density in Ontario’s thirty largest municipalities and Thunder Bay ranks fifth from the bottom.  Figure 2 takes those same municipalities and plots their multi-residential total property tax rate from highest to lowest.

 

 

 

 

 

 It turns out that Thunder Bay has the third highest multi-residential rate – just after Chatham-Kent and Windsor.  According to the 2022 BMA Municipal Report analysis, the average multi-residential rate in Ontario communities was 2.04% but in Thunder Bay it was 3.12%. Other examples include Brampton 1.56%, Hamilton, 2.73 percent, Burlington 1.45%, Sault Ste Marie 1.77%, Greater Sudbury 2.98%, and Guelph, 1.99%.  Elliot Lake is higher at 4.0%, Belleville at 3.24%, Port Colborne at 3.45%, and Timmins at 3.35%.  My point is larger cities - of which Thunder Bay is still considered one - tend to have lower rates but Thunder Bay taxes its multi-residential more like a much smaller town.  Why is Thunder Bay so spread out?  True density is penalized by its property tax structure.

 

Now it should be noted that a high multi-residential property tax rate in and of itself is not evidence that it is discouraging density development. In general, municipalities with weaker tax bases tend to have higher rates in general to provide the same range of services often mandated by the provincial government.  In this respect, Thunder Bay is in good company with other cities whose former lucrative industrial tax base has seen decline – Windsor, Sudbury, Hamilton, and St. Catharines.  Thunder Bay just has high rates in general and it also has the third highest residential tax rates of these thirty municipalities.

 

What is more relevant is not the multi-residential tax rate per se but the difference between the multi-residential rate and the single unit residential rate in a given municipality.  The greater the gap between the multi-residential rate and the residential rate applied to a given value of assessed property, the greater the incentive to build single residential housing units as opposed to multi-residential units.  While Thunder Bay has some of the highest residential and multi-residential total property tax rates in the province, it also has one of the highest differences between the two.  Relatively speaking, the larger the gap, one would expect a  greater tax disincentive to invest in large multi-unit residential properties, all other things given.  As a result, one would also expect to see a relationship between the size of the gap and the degree of urban population density with a larger gap correlated with lower population density.

 

 

 

Figure 3 tries to do exactly that.  It plots a scatter-plot for Ontario’s thirty largest municipalities of municipal population density as a function of the difference between the two rates.  The larger the difference -that is the higher the gap between multi-residential and residential property rates – the lower the population density, all other things given.  Of course, all other things are not given and there may indeed be other variables influencing urban density not just in Thunder Bay but other cities as well.  After all, robust economic growth that pours more people into a fixed geographic space is also a way to increase population and urban density.  However, parsing everything out would require a fairly expensive study – this is after all, just a blog – but that would mean paying a lot of money to consultants for answers Thunder Bay City Council and Administration probably do not want to hear. Namely, Thunder Bay’s municipal tax system and development policies discourage density and encourage sprawl.  Rule of Thumb. If you want less of anything, tax it more heavily.

The Thunder Bay That Never Was

 

For all sad words of tongue and pen.

The saddest are these, “It might have been.”

John Greenleaf Whittier

 

As a result of its historic evolution from the twin cities of Fort William and Port Arthur, Thunder Bay has always had two former downtown cores that have been the focus of constant attempts at revitalization as well as a third commercial retail core in the former intercity area.  Three downtowns for a city of 125,000 is a lot of downtowns and yet the process of revitalization continues unabated.  The latest iterations are the recent local media stories dealing first with the downtown north core which being adjacent to the waterfront has emerged as the “entertainment” and “tourist” district.  A planned reconstruction of the downtown street here to emphasize walkability at a total of $13.2 million is now considerably above the original estimates.  And on the other side of town, there is another major streetscape project that is even more involved as it requires the complicated dismantling of the Victoriaville Mall which was placed on top of the major downtown intersection at Victoria and Syndicate.  This too will require many millions of dollars – about $11 million in one estimate - and is likely to see cost increases before we are done. 

 

The evolution of both downtowns has marked a return to more open street and pedestrian spaces that were blocked by the erection in the 1970s and early 80s by downtown street enclosing and blocking malls – Keskus on the north side and Victoriaville on the south. Keskus was finally demolished in 1999 to make way for downtown development centered on the arrival of the OLG Thunder Bay Charity Casino.  The result has been a more vibrant downtown area of shops and restaurants.  There is a similar expectation of this happening in the south side after the removal of Victoriaville Mall.  In the end, both downtowns along with the intercity area have evolved to some extent in a manner remarkably similar to the paths outlined in several Chronicle Journal newspaper articles and opeds authored in the late 1980s and early 1990s (CJ “Assign each city core its own specializations, Weds. July 26, 1989; CJ City at a Crossroads Series, November 16, 17 & 24, 1990).  That is “core specialization” with the north side downtown a “tourism-commercial” area given the presence of the harbour and waterfront, the south side downtown an “administrative-commercial” area given the concentration of city government there and intercity area as “commercial-industrial”. 

 

With some exceptions this is somewhat what has happened.  The former Port Arthur Downtown has a waterfront park and the arrival of the new Art Gallery will be an important addition to a critical mass of activities and functions making it a tourism and entertainment core.  The former Fort William downtown has City of Thunder Bay offices making it the administrative core.  Meanwhile, intercity has become the choice for new retail development.  At the same time, there is a lot of inconsistency given that the community auditorium is in the intercity area rather than in a spectacular waterfront setting, there is still a substantial city office and utility presence in the Whelan building in the north core and the main arena complex – the Fort William Gardens – remains in Fort William.  And then, a plethora of public buildings – Mini Queen’s Park, a new federal building, and the public health unit as well as assorted offices – went outside the Fort William Core to off of Arthur Street, the Balmoral Area and intercity.  However, given the long-established urban pattern and historical rivalry between the two twin cities, such is the weight of history and adjustment, and change takes a long time in Thunder Bay.  And there is the reality that private developers will develop land they own to realize a return and not necessarily to implement an urban planning vision.

 

Still, change has occurred but all of this change and development pales somewhat with the anticipated urban renewal and development plans of the 1960s.  Urban renewal gripped Ontario municipalities in the 1960s and the former cities of Port Arthur and Fort William commissioned consultants coordinated by engineering firm Proctor and Redfern to put together comprehensive studies and recommendations on their downtown cores.  They were comprehensive plans for renewal of the aging cores that included general land use, streets and traffic analysis, parking, pedestrian circulation, and transit that assumed that both downtowns would retain their comparative size and strength and remain centers of activity.  The Port Arthur Report was delivered in February of 1968 and the Fort William Report in April of 1969.  

 

 

 

The before and after illustrations are quite dramatic.  Port Arthur has plans for a dramatic waterfront park and civic centre and plaza, plans for streetscaping and a new senior complex.  Fort William’s downtown plan was even more ambitious with apartment blocks along Vickers Street, a new civic complex and riverfront park adjacent to the current city hall. The removal of the tracks along the Kam River was shown with a new thoroughfare and a set of high-rise riverfront dwellings along a park and boardwalk.  As for shopping, a new retail mall on land off of May Street to be called the Kam Center was proposed. As the accompanying illustrations show, the downtowns especially in Fort William were to be higher density areas and pedestrian intensive.  In many respects, the downtown areas would be “15 minute” cities with many services within walking distance of where people lived.

 

 

 

 

 

Alas, the reports presented an urban downtown picture that did not come to pass for a variety of reasons.  First, they of course were made immediately obsolete by the Amalgamation that fused the two cities together and the resulting politics created new initiatives that included two downtown malls as part of core revitalization.  Second, the plans failed to anticipate and realize the rise of the intercity area which after Amalgamation meant it was poised to be readily developed as the choice location given it was between the two population clusters.  Third, the 1970s much like the rest of the country saw a suburban housing boom that led to car intensive sprawl rather than infill in the downtown cores.  And finally, there was a massive overestimate of where Thunder Bay’s population was going given that the proposals assumed rather robust population growth for the Lakehead area that by 1986 was forecast under various assumptions to range anywhere from about 150,000 to 175,000.  Indeed, under such assumptions, Thunder Bay today would be well over 200,000 but such growth was not supported by the future evolution of either the city’s economy or its demographics

 

 

 

 

 

At the same time, the Port Arthur waterfront park envisioned in 1968 has in many respects come to pass though without the massive civic plaza.  And the rehabilitation of Arthur Street (now Red River Road) has occurred as well as the senior’s complex on Cumberland.  As for Fort William, the results are more disappointing in that there is no William McGillivray Boulevard skirting the Kam River and a riverfront park and boardwalk, or density high-rise housing along the riverfront or a new Civic centre adjacent to the current City Hall.  As for retail, the street blocking Victoriaville emerged in the late 1970s but not the proposed Kam Centre.  The urban reality that evolved reflected the needs and wants of the times as well as the political environment.  Still, it is fun to look back and wonder what might have been under different circumstances.  There may even be some ideas in those old plans worth exploring further.