[JasonParis]

Cannabis retailers no longer needing to cover their windows is a small change that boosts safety, transparency, and street appeal. Very happy about this.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Cannabis retailers no longer needing to cover their windows is a small change that boosts safety, transparency, and street appeal. Very happy about this.

Would like to see window displays at the LCBO and The Beer Store. (With empty bottles and cans, of course. To prevent explosions from the sun heating the displays.)

 

[DSCToronto]

Cannabis retailers no longer needing to cover their windows is a small change that boosts safety, transparency, and street appeal. Very happy about this.

It is interesting that when I complained about the covered windows a few years ago I was told by Health Canada it was a FEDERAL requirement.

"Thank you for your email on January 18th, 2022, concerning the promotion of cannabis. We apologize for the delay in responding.

The Controlled Substances and Cannabis Branch (CSCB) is responsible for developing and implementing legislation, regulations, policies and operational programs that support the control of cannabis.

Please allow us to take this opportunity to outline some information that may be of interest to you.

Through the Cannabis Act and its regulations, the Government of Canada is working to better protect the health and safety of Canadians, keep cannabis out of the hands of youth, and keep profits from criminals and organized crime. To achieve these objectives, the Act includes provisions to restrict youth access to cannabis, and to strictly control possession, production, distribution and sale of cannabis in Canada including the advertising and promotion of cannabis.

The Cannabis Act defines promote as:

promote, in respect of a thing or service, means to make, for the purpose of selling the thing or service, a representation — other than a representation on a package or label — about the thing or service by any means, whether directly or indirectly, that is likely to influence and shape attitudes, beliefs and behaviours about the thing or service. (promotion)

Pursuant to section 29 of the Cannabis Act, unless authorized under this Act, it is prohibited for a person that is authorized to sell cannabis to display it, or any package or label of cannabis, in a manner that may result in the cannabis, package or label being seen by a young person.

In addition, section 30 of the Cannabis Act states that unless authorized under this Act, it is prohibited for a person that sells a cannabis accessory to display it, or any package or label of a cannabis accessory, in a manner that may result in the cannabis accessory, package or label being seen by a young person.

Please note, the Cannabis Act is not prescriptive of the method to comply with sections 29 and 30. The method used to meet these requirements is a business decision by the regulated party.

The federal government’s approach is centered on protecting youth from known health risks of cannabis use, and working to keep those under the age of majority from accessing it. The specific provisions in the Cannabis Act that are designed to help keep cannabis and its products out of the hands of children include:

• Prohibiting the provision or sale of cannabis to youth under the age of 18 (some provinces and territories have established a higher age limit);

• Creating a new offence for selling or giving to or using a minor to commit an offence relating to the distribution, sale, import, export, or production of cannabis;

• Prohibiting the sale, packaging, and labelling of cannabis products that are considered appealing to youth;

• Preventing youth from being persuaded to use cannabis products by establishing many of the same advertising restrictions that exist for tobacco products;

• Prohibiting the sale of cannabis through a self-service display or vending machine; and

• Requiring childproof packaging, a universal THC symbol, and health warning messages."

Hmmm

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

New documents reinforce that Science Centre closure was not supported by engineers​

The Ontario Science Centre was shuttered on June 21, 2024, with the Ontario government claiming that a structural roof issue made it unsafe. New documents suggest that the engineers inspecting the roof didn't agree.​

From https://www.canadianarchitect.com/draft-engineering-reports-didnt-suggest-closure-of-ontario-science-centre-new-documents-reveal/

New documents, obtained by Canadian Architect through a freedom of information request, appear to indicate that Rimkus—the structural engineers hired to assess the Ontario Science Centre’s roof before its closure—did not support closing the Centre for public safety reasons.

The draft versions of the report instead recommend regular, routine maintenance to the roofs over the course of the coming 20 years.

When read in conjunction with correspondence preceding the closure obtained by Global News, it seems likely that the engineers were pressured by the government to produce a report that would support the shuttering of the Ontario Science Centre. However, such a recommendation was not supported by their research and expertise.

Canadian Architect obtained draft versions of parts of the Rimkus report from March, April, and May of 2024. The report, whose final version is dated June 18, 2024, was commissioned to assess the condition of the Science Centre’s reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) roof panels, an outdated form of construction that can pose problems over time if not properly maintained. It was based on on-site investigations conducted by Rimkus from December 2023 to March 2024.

In a key section on RAAC Panel Recommendations, the March and April versions of the report clearly recommend to proceed with repairs to a set of panels identified as “high risk”—less than 2.5% of the Science Centre’s roofs—over the summer. It reads: “It is Rimkus’ recommendation to address all 2024 RAAC panel repair (amber risk) locations as a single project. As such, it is our opinion that the most cost effective strategy would be a consistent repair approach. Panel replacement rather than reinforcement is feasible at all areas, and presented in Table 7.”

The government seems to have pushed the engineers to go further, asking how the RAAC risk could be entirely eliminated. The May version adds the sentences: “It is recommended that RAAC panels should be replaced at the time of the next scheduled roof replacement, to completely eliminate the RAAC panel risk. Recommended timelines for complete roof assembly and RAAC panel (where applicable) replacements, and budgetary costs, by roof area are shown in Table 8.”

In the March, April, and May versions of the report, there is no provision for declining to do the repairs—simply because roof repairs are a relatively routine, straightforward undertaking. RAAC panels at the Science Centre had been routinely replaced in the past. At the time of the inspection, a half dozen panels were identified as being in critical condition, and were already being replaced while the report was completed. A building permit was in progress to repair a section of the roof over the rainforest room. The cost of the immediate repairs needed would amount to around $500,000—or just over $7 million, if coupled with replacing, repairing, and maintaining larger sections of the Science Centre’s roofs that year.

And yet, the language apparently wasn’t strong enough for the Ontario government, whose communications staffers aimed to justify the closure as a public safety issue. For the final version of the report, government officials seem to have pressed the engineers to answer the question: what if we just don’t do the repairs? Wouldn’t the only totally safe option, in that case, be to close the building?

As a result, the final version of the report included the following passage: “Where replacement or reinforcement cannot be completed within the recommended time frame, then one of the following supplemental risk mitigation options is recommended and should be implemented in conjunction with the snow/load monitoring program:

 

[lenaitch]

It is interesting that when I complained about the covered windows a few years ago I was told by Health Canada it was a FEDERAL requirement.

"Thank you for your email on January 18th, 2022, concerning the promotion of cannabis. We apologize for the delay in responding.

The Controlled Substances and Cannabis Branch (CSCB) is responsible for developing and implementing legislation, regulations, policies and operational programs that support the control of cannabis.

Please allow us to take this opportunity to outline some information that may be of interest to you.

Through the Cannabis Act and its regulations, the Government of Canada is working to better protect the health and safety of Canadians, keep cannabis out of the hands of youth, and keep profits from criminals and organized crime. To achieve these objectives, the Act includes provisions to restrict youth access to cannabis, and to strictly control possession, production, distribution and sale of cannabis in Canada including the advertising and promotion of cannabis.

The Cannabis Act defines promote as:

promote, in respect of a thing or service, means to make, for the purpose of selling the thing or service, a representation — other than a representation on a package or label — about the thing or service by any means, whether directly or indirectly, that is likely to influence and shape attitudes, beliefs and behaviours about the thing or service. (promotion)

Pursuant to section 29 of the Cannabis Act, unless authorized under this Act, it is prohibited for a person that is authorized to sell cannabis to display it, or any package or label of cannabis, in a manner that may result in the cannabis, package or label being seen by a young person.

In addition, section 30 of the Cannabis Act states that unless authorized under this Act, it is prohibited for a person that sells a cannabis accessory to display it, or any package or label of a cannabis accessory, in a manner that may result in the cannabis accessory, package or label being seen by a young person.

Please note, the Cannabis Act is not prescriptive of the method to comply with sections 29 and 30. The method used to meet these requirements is a business decision by the regulated party.

The federal government’s approach is centered on protecting youth from known health risks of cannabis use, and working to keep those under the age of majority from accessing it. The specific provisions in the Cannabis Act that are designed to help keep cannabis and its products out of the hands of children include:

• Prohibiting the provision or sale of cannabis to youth under the age of 18 (some provinces and territories have established a higher age limit);

• Creating a new offence for selling or giving to or using a minor to commit an offence relating to the distribution, sale, import, export, or production of cannabis;

• Prohibiting the sale, packaging, and labelling of cannabis products that are considered appealing to youth;

• Preventing youth from being persuaded to use cannabis products by establishing many of the same advertising restrictions that exist for tobacco products;

• Prohibiting the sale of cannabis through a self-service display or vending machine; and

• Requiring childproof packaging, a universal THC symbol, and health warning messages."

Hmmm

Boy, I hope the Health Canada communications person didn't pull anything making that leap from 'advertising' and 'display' to window coverings.

 

[guavadelic]

I've skimmed through the budget..........

I'm not encouraged.


The deficit balloons to nearly 15B this year, its projected to drop to just under 8B next year with balance/negligible surplus in 2027-2028.

Deficit keeps increasing yet housing remains unaffordable, traffic gridlock gets worse by the year, transit projects perpetually delayed, health care system crumbling, unemployment rising......Both the present and future of this province seems incredibly bleak.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Cannabis retailers no longer needing to cover their windows is a small change that boosts safety, transparency, and street appeal. Very happy about this.

I’m still amazed that the remaining cannabis shops have sufficient sales and profits to pay the rent. I assume that even a small shop is paying at least $5k a month for rent.

 

[picard102]

Boy, I hope the Health Canada communications person didn't pull anything making that leap from 'advertising' and 'display' to window coverings.

What's the leap? If you can see it through a window, it's still on display to minors (Section 29). Cigarettes also need to be covered from view.

I'm more curious to see what the plan will be to display product while still not allowing minors to see it.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Deficit keeps increasing yet housing remains unaffordable, traffic gridlock gets worse by the year, transit projects perpetually delayed, health care system crumbling, unemployment rising......Both the present and future of this province seems incredibly bleak.

I think one must ask what pockets are being lined here. It’s not going to where and to the people that need it the most…

…that includes what taxes are being disproportionately cut.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

What Doug Ford could learn from Paris, the city where car was once king​

From https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-what-doug-ford-could-learn-from-paris-the-city-where-car-was-once-king/?intcmp=gift_subscribed

The Bourne Identity is a 2002 spy thriller starring Matt Damon as an assassin with amnesia who is struggling to uncover his past. It’s a movie-night favourite at my place and I have watched it more times than I can count.

The Paris that Bourne races around, trying to avoid the many cops and killers who are out to get him, is a place of honking cars and heavy traffic, completely dominated by the automobile. Today’s Paris is a different city altogether.

When I visited this week, fleets of bicycles sailed along busy bike lanes and crowds of pedestrians strolled along streets that have been closed to motor-vehicle traffic. The air is cleaner, the streets quieter than when I’ve been before. Friends who are living in Paris say they wake up to the sound of bird song instead of growling car and motorcycle engines.

None of this happened naturally. Under Anne Hidalgo, mayor since 2014, Paris made a deliberate decision to end the tyranny of the automobile. In keeping with its history, the city where the car was king committed regicide.

It added hundreds of kilometres of bike lanes, expanded its wildly successful bike-share program, removed thousands of parking spots, raised downtown rates for street parking, cut the speed limit to 30 kilometres an hour and banned vehicle traffic around many schools.

You would not be wrong to call it a war on the car. The result is a victory for the city.

A study last year found that 11.2 per cent of trips in Paris proper (excluding its suburbs) are made by bike, compared with just 4.3 by car. Half of trips are made on foot and 30 per cent on the city’s superb public transit network, which has been growing by leaps in recent years.

A host of other cities have taken a similar path. Amsterdam and Copenhagen, once clogged by traffic, have become cycling meccas. Equally clogged London brought in a congestion tax that discouraged people from driving downtown at peak hours. Even New York recently started charging a $9 fee for driving south of 60th Street in Manhattan. Result: fewer car-crash injuries, fewer noise complaints, fewer school-bus delays, more transit riders and faster bus trips.

If Doug Ford has absorbed any of this, he is not showing it. Instead of joining the Paris-led urban revolution, he is attempting a counter-revolution. The Ontario Premier has announced plans to rip out three Toronto bike lanes. This week’s provincial budget added two more to the hit list.

He is also removing the tolls on part of the 407, making a cut to the gas tax permanent and spending billions on new and improved highways. The words “highway” and “highways” appear 156 times in the budget document tabled on Thursday. It reiterates Mr. Ford’s nutty vow to build an underground expressway beneath the congested 401.

All is not lost, though. Despite Mr. Ford, Toronto can still become more Parisian. With the aim of reducing the number of traffic fatalities on city streets, it has already lowered speed limits, increased the number of red-light cameras, built out the bike-lane system and created special safety zones around schools.

Naturally, it is getting some pushback, especially over bike lanes. Many motorists are feeling frustrated, even persecuted. A speed camera that stands along a busy commuting corridor, Parkside Drive, has been cut down by vandals four times in five months.

Paris faced lots of resistance, too. Conservative politicians and motorists’ organizations screamed bloody murder when city council ordered the permanent closure of a highway along the right bank of the Seine, now a pleasant waterfront park that sports deck chairs, palm trees and beach sand during the summer. Taxi drivers and many motorists still curse the name of Ms. Hidalgo for slashing the number of driving lanes on major streets such as the Rue de Rivoli. Some Parisians say that, these days, speeding bikes and scooters are nearly as much of a menace as cars once were.

But the city is pressing ahead. Its latest big step has been to limit traffic in much of its historic centre. Only those who live and work there are supposed to drive into it. Just this March, Parisians voted in a plebiscite to convert another 500 streets to pedestrian zones.

Ms. Hidalgo has said that after making so much progress, it is “out of the question that we let ourselves get invaded by cars and pollution” again. There will be no return to the tyranny of the car in Paris.

Under Anne Hidalgo, mayor since 2014, Paris made a deliberate decision to end the tyranny of the automobile. Commuters ride their bikes in a bike lane along Boulevard de Sebastopol, in central Paris on April 4.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Meanwhile...

Rob Ford's former home on Edenbridge Drive was sold in August of 2022 for $1,610,000. It is now being TORN DOWN. Rob Ford's brother, Doug Ford, was trustee of the estate, charged with managing it and disbursing money to the beneficiaries.

 

[DSCToronto]

Meanwhile...

Rob Ford's former home on Edenbridge Drive was sold in August of 2022 for $1,610,000. It is now being TORN DOWN. Rob Ford's brother, Doug Ford, was trustee of the estate, charged with managing it and disbursing money to the beneficiaries.

A demolition seems odd as they just did and are doing renos

and

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

A demolition seems odd as they just did and are doing renos

View attachment 654468
and

View attachment 654469

Looks like they tore off the roof for the second floor addition. Looks like a "minor" addition.

 

[Towered]

Meanwhile...

Rob Ford's former home on Edenbridge Drive was sold in August of 2022 for $1,610,000. It is now being TORN DOWN. Rob Ford's brother, Doug Ford, was trustee of the estate, charged with managing it and disbursing money to the beneficiaries.

Actually noticed that driving by last week but forgot to mention it here.

 

[lenaitch]

So it's not being torn down but added to.