Sudbury hosts public sessions for Downtown Master Plan
Greater Sudbury hosted two sessions Wednesday at Tom Davies Square to get the public's opinion on the Downtown Master Plan.
Greater Sudbury hosted two sessions Wednesday to get the public's opinion on the Downtown Master Plan.
The first took place from 1-3 p.m. at Tom Davies Square, where attendees had the chance to fill out surveys and look at maps showcasing 50 different ideas.
'In March, we did what's called a downtown visioning session,' said Ed Landry, senior planner with the city.
'And we unveiled a new vision and new strategies associated with the downtown master plan or downtown for the next 30 years. We started getting into some of the projects that people were looking forward to seeing in the downtown. And so today's sessions are really about that.'
Site selected for events centre
Since the March session, Landry said some decisions have been made for some of the projects, such as the location of the new events centre.
'And so what do we place around that? So we're interested to hear from, people's thoughts on that,' he said.
'Also, we've got a new cultural hub that'll be located in this building ... how do we react to that?'
Gary Petrian and Sheila Kelly-Petrian, who have lived in Sudbury all their lives, attended the session to see plans for the downtown's future.
'Seeing some developments and some positive developments down here, I think is crucial.'
— Sheila Kelly-Petrian
'We live in the area. We love the area. It's the historic centre of Sudbury,' Kelly-Petrian said.
'So seeing some developments and some positive developments down here, I think is crucial.'
Petrian said he supported the new events centre being located downtown.
'I really like the Sudbury Arena is going to stay downtown and it's a big drawing point. We can build from there,' he said.
'Also, (Elm Place) is also now being occupied much better with the farmers market and things like that.'
Susan Levesque, fundraising and fund development officer with the Art Gallery of Sudbury, said she's excited about the new Cultural Hub, which will serve as the new home for the gallery.
'We're part of the Cultural Hub, which is one of the items on the master plan,' Levesque said.
'In 2027, we will open in the provincial building, which is 199 Larch St. We will have five office floors. So that's exciting -- and we cannot wait to make that transition.'
Levesque said the art gallery will be renamed the Franklin Carmichael Art Gallery of Sudbury.
'We are very honoured to receive, several works from his family, which is wonderful,' she said.
'And we can't wait to exhibit those works in the near future.'
Jeff MacIntyre, Downtown Sudbury executive director, said he's seeing a lot of excitement from businesses and residents about the future of the area.
'We've had some new businesses, open up some great new restaurants,' MacIntyre said.
'We're hearing more people kick the tires on some of the spaces that we have downtown. Excited about things to come.'
The second session was scheduled to take place from 6-8 p.m. Wednesday in provincial boardrooms C and D at Tom Davies Square.
Landry said a final draft will be presented to the community in early fall, with the city planning to finalize the master plan by the end of 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
39 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
How Michael Sabia can make Ottawa move fast and build things
Michael Sabia is being asked to reverse, in a matter of months, an inertia that has taken hold in the nation's capital over decades. Since Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that the erstwhile chief executive officer of Hydro-Québec will serve as Clerk of the Privy Council – the country's top bureaucrat – Ottawa has been rife with speculation about how Mr. Sabia will try to light a fire under a federal public service accustomed to moving more slowly and cautiously than is demanded by the current moment. But while much of the chatter following Mr. Sabia's June 11 appointment has been about personnel changes to the bureaucracy's highest ranks – through an expansive shuffle of deputy ministers, the most senior civil servants in each ministry, expected this summer – that only scratches the surface of what's needed to get things rolling. Hanging in the balance is an agenda, put forward by Mr. Carney to assert Canada's economic sovereignty, that's at odds with the government's implementation capacity to date. It includes fast-tracking energy and infrastructure projects, scaling homegrown technologies, diversifying exports, building housing, reorienting immigration, developing self-reliant supply chains and leveraging industrial gains from increased defence spending. Opinion: Michael Sabia faces an uphill climb in reforming Canada's civil service The scale of the challenge – and what sorts of structural, cultural and personnel changes could be required – were conveyed to The Globe and Mail in recent interviews with two dozen people closely familiar with the bureaucracy's workings, including current and former deputy ministers and senior political officials. Although there was recognition that some departments have functioned better than others (and some have stepped up in other times of crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic and 2008 global financial meltdown), they highlighted an array of overarching barriers that have taken root since the 1990s, if not earlier. Among them are a depletion of talent despite the bureaucracy's total ranks growing; particular lack of implementation expertise in some economic areas and policy mechanisms Mr. Carney is prioritizing; disconnect between the public and private sectors; a lack of clear lines of accountability; failure to make use of modern technologies; and severe aversion to taking risks. Mr. Sabia's suitability to tackling all of that, if anyone can, is a subject of considerable debate. Over a late-career run that has included heading pension giant Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, serving as deputy finance minister and then leading Hydro-Québec, he's earned a reputation as a creative policy maker and architect of big, ambitious projects. Among them are the Canada Infrastructure Bank, the Canada Growth Fund and a new hydroelectricity relationship between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. He is also, like Mr. Carney, a rare Canadian executive who has moved fluidly between government and the private sector, giving him an unusual combination of institutional knowledge and outside perspective. At the same time, with his federal experience limited mostly to the Finance department, he may have less knowledge of government-wide dynamics than previous clerks who were career bureaucrats. Sharing some of Mr. Carney's suffer-no-fools reputation, it's an open question how he'll fare at bringing others along. And with a recent pattern of staying in jobs long enough to set big plans in motion and then moving on, it's not clear how much emphasis he'll place on long-term systemic reforms. But If ever there were a time for impatience to be a virtue, this might be it. While there are widespread calls around Ottawa for a formal, government-wide program review to comprehensively reallocate resources and modernize rules and processes – the sort of effort last seriously undertaken by Jean Chrétien's government in the '90s – that push could take most of Mr. Carney's mandate to complete. By then, the opportunity to seize on Canada's elbows-up moment with a transformative economic agenda, in response to U.S. President Donald Trump, might have passed. The hope among some reform-minded government veterans is that Mr. Carney and Mr. Sabia land on a two-track approach – in which they set in motion long-term structural overhaul, to leave the government in better shape than they found it, but more immediately send whatever signals and create whatever workarounds are needed to get stuff done now. That may not be a viable pathway to overcoming every obstacle. There may, for instance, be few quick fixes for Ottawa's reliance on outdated technologies and information systems. But three of the biggest potential obstacles to implementing Mr. Carney's agenda are instructive, in terms of how it could work. A common perception in Ottawa is that high-level bureaucratic talent has diminished over the past couple of decades. More specifically, there are widely acknowledged expertise gaps. In a government that has traditionally done most spending through grants and transfer payments, that includes lack of comfort with more complex financial tools that Mr. Carney may be looking to deploy in industrial strategies. And lack of employment mobility, between the public and private sectors, has contributed to a perceived disconnect between career bureaucrats in Ottawa and policies' real-world impacts. There are many fundamental ways to address those shortcoming – new strategies around recruitment and career advancement, changing pay structures, using technology to expedite glacial hiring processes. Most contentiously, but increasingly whispered about, Ottawa could loosen bilingualism requirements to broaden its pool. Canada has 'ambition deficit' and regulations that are scaring away investment, Sabia says In the near term, the most obvious lever is the anticipated deputy-minister shuffle, following a small shuffle that took place this month. It could see Mr. Sabia bringing in some new faces, and perhaps more so trying to elevate younger talent already in the bureaucracy, even if they have not worked their way up as gradually as has been customary. But many people interviewed for this story also suggested Ottawa may have to get more creative about bringing in people from industry – and possibly provincial governments – to work on policy priorities of Mr. Carney's for which they have specific expertise. That could potentially be done under Interchange Canada, an underutilized federal program enabling exchanges between the public and private sectors. It could also see people seconded from outside government, forming hybrid teams with bureaucrats to advance key files. Navigating conflict-of-interest considerations would be a challenge – but not, by most accounts, an insurmountable one. And Mr. Sabia's unusual history straddling the public and private sectors could help convince others to do so. A near-universal lament is that civil servants feel incentivized to keep their heads down and avoid risks – in putting forward new ideas, or taking ownership of moving policies forward. That's partly because of additional rules and guidelines layered on after any sort of spending or ethics controversy. Paring those down, to maintain but simplify accountability, is seen as a long-term play. But it's also because of a common perception that politicians are prepared to throw bureaucrats under the bus – or shove them in front of parliamentary committees – at the first sign of trouble, rather than taking heat themselves. And that's where there may be an opportunity to quickly pursue culture change. Mr. Sabia could help by sending a signal across the bureaucracy that people who take initiative and move quickly will be valued. Much will come down to Mr. Carney. His tone, early on, has suggested that expedience and ambition are the priority. But bureaucrats tend to say that the real message about risk tolerance will come from how tolerant he and his ministers prove when moving fast causes something to go wrong. Another oft-cited reason for slowness and lack of individual initiative is that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. While recent growth of the total federal workforce (well above 300,000 people) is likely to be targeted by Mr. Carney for cost savings, ballooning upper ranks – assistant deputy ministers, associate deputy ministers, directors-general, etc. – have particularly bogged down decision-making by creating hierarchical confusion. So too, bureaucrats counter, has an excess of political staff – numbering around 800, by the end of former prime minister Justin Trudeau's tenure, far more than in other Westminster democracies – dipping in and out of files. Not to mention decisions notoriously getting log-jammed in the Prime Minister's Office. That crowdedness is crying out for a review aimed at paring back and simplifying lines of authority. But some of that could be done informally, for now. While a small number of top priorities will inevitably have heavy involvement from the PMO – and the Privy Council Office, the (also enlarged) bureaucratic department that supports it – the rest could be delegated to ministries with minimal central interference. And deputies there could be pushed to identify a small number of their top performers to push things through, bruised egos be damned. As with other possible quick fixes, it could be inelegant. But Mr. Carney has been elected, and Mr. Sabia appointed, with promised focus on results. Those results may include a dramatically restructured federal government. But they may not have time to wait for it, if they want to get everything else done.
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Michael Taube: Mark Carney leans European, but needs to buy American again
Article content It will also 'promote multilateral dialogue and co-operation with like-minded countries in relevant areas of security and defence where considered mutually beneficial.' Some of the matters mentioned in the agreement include support to Ukraine, peacekeeping operations, military mobility, maritime security, sharing information on defence initiatives and cybersecurity. Article content And it doesn't stop there. Businesses will be encouraged to 'grow and diversify markets by fully and effectively implementing' the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. The parties also agreed to work towards a 'digital trade agreement,' 'identify trends and risks of mutual concern that could affect our economic security,' 'reduce barriers and strengthen agriculture and agrifood trade' and focus on shared energy needs. Article content What about the future of Canada-U.S. relations? While there have been issues between our two countries due to U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs and leadership style, it's vitally important for Carney to rebuild ties with the U.S. There have been political, economic and military disagreements between Canada and the U.S. before. We fought one another during the War of 1812. Nevertheless, we always found ways to agree to disagree and move forward like good friends and allies do. Article content Article content Things looked promising at one point. Carney said earlier this month that his government was 'in intensive negotiations with the Americans' to end the tariffs on aluminum and steel that chilled relations between our two countries. Carney and Trump also agreed to work towards an economic and security pact within the next 30 days during last week's G7 summit in Kananaskis, Alta. Article content Alas, Carney's determined tone has noticeably shifted. He's now hemming and hawing about the path forward. 'We'll do what's right for Canada,' he told reporters in Brussels. 'We're working hard to get a deal, but we'll only accept the right deal with the United States. The right deal is possible, but nothing's assured.' Article content Trump then announced on Friday through his Truth Social account that he was 'terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately.' Why? This was due to Canada's decision to introduce a 'Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies.' Trump believed the Carney Liberal government was 'obviously copying the European Union' with this tax, and felt it was a 'direct and blatant attack' on the U.S. Article content Article content No one is suggesting that Carney is obligated to bend to Trump's every whim and desire during these crucial negotiations. At the same time, this is hardly the sort of descriptive language and rhetorical tone he should be using in public before the July 21 deadline. Article content If there have been issues between the two sides, fine. All Carney had to do was take a more neutral position for the bulk of the 30-day process and crescendo accordingly. This would have shown that he recognized the importance of preserving Canada-U.S. relations and was taking things seriously. It would have been hard to argue against such logic. Article content It appears that Carney's infatuation with the EU has further strained our friendship with the U.S. for the foreseeable future. While some will claim that Trump is the main reason, it's a false narrative. He'll be out of office in a number of years, as will Carney. The devastating political and economic effects of a fractured Canada-U.S. relationship will last long past then. Article content Article content Article content
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
‘Zombie firms': Hudson's Bay among Canadian business that are ‘severe drag' to economy
Tom Goldsmith, founder and principal of Orbit Policy, joins BNN Bloomberg to discuss the economical impact of 'zombie firms'. Hudson's Bay was a 'zombie firm' that was struggling to keep the lights on for years before its inevitable shuttering, one expert says – and Canada is home to many more. Tom Goldsmith, founder and principal of Orbit Policy told BNN Bloomberg that retail outlets like The Bay and many other retail outlets did not respond innovatively in the face of competition, which led to its ultimate, rapid downfall. 'In the base case, you have a story of venture capital coming in and asset stripping, essentially, and really kind of taking away the productive capacity of the organization,' Goldsmith said. What is a 'zombie firm'? The term 'zombie firm' was first coined in the 1990s in Japan. According to Statistics Canada, it was used to describe economically underperforming businesses when they were being kept alive by government and bank loans. Goldsmith describes them as 'mature firms that persist and are a severe drag to our economy.' A StatCan report from 2023 says zombie firms have been increasing over the past few decades in advanced economies like Canada's, claiming that they influence the national productivity, subdue wages and restrain the growth of healthy firms. The same report claims that between five and seven per cent of all Canadian businesses are zombies, which could potentially be the highest in the world. 'While the share of zombies among all firms has been declining since 2011, the share of zombies among publicly traded firms has steadily increased,' the report said, adding that between 18 to 36 per cent are publicly traded firms that fit the description of the zombies – most prevalent in the mining, oil and gas extraction sector. How can businesses be kept from going under as the market shifts? A combination of factors keeps older businesses like Simons afloat, amid the influx of newer business models, Goldsmith says. '(It's) just business leadership, the quality of actual leadership and strategy and decision making,' he says. Meanwhile, Goldsmith says only 25 per cent of firms get a return on their investment for AI adoption. 'A lot of that depends on the quality of the strategy you have,' he said. According to Goldsmith, deploying new technologies and taking advantage of new opportunities is paramount when dealing with AI. Like Simons, the companies need to have a virtual presence and an e-commerce position that attracts consumers. Meanwhile, a company like the Bay starts out as a viable business, then comes the privatization and the debt imposition, according to Goldsmith. 'Part of this picture is the fact that some of these firms have been bought by leverage buyouts,' he said. 'They might have had revenues that were able to pay their debt payments before being thought about. After that, they then get turned into these companies that act as this drag on the economy.' Could AI adoption become an impending issue? It depends on the type of firm it is. However, the evidence suggests that zombie firms are a good thing, he explains. 'They freeze resources,' Goldsmith said. 'It frees talent, it frees capital that could be better spent elsewhere. Other firms that are good are going to struggle.' Goldsmith says it will all come down to the workforce and the talent hired by the companies when it comes to AI adoption. 'AI is a tool, especially in technology sectors. Where, how it fits in your workflows is so varied that there needs to be a collaborative engagement between management and workers to actually make the best of it,' Goldsmith said. 'Are firms actually doing that? Are they having top-down mandates? Forecast strategies? That's a big question. How do we make the most out of this technology?'
