Dan’s Bylaw Prohibiting Smoking in City Parks …

no smoke… that would be Dan MacQuarrie … plus more City Hall news.

Updates from last evening’s session of council:

The city gave third reading to the Parks Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 3954 (Prohibit Smoking in City Parks) and the associated fines bylaw.

Dan MacQuarrie was present for the vote and was recognized for his steadfast promotion of the initiative by having the rare occurrence of having his name attached to the actual bylaw. Dan, a previous council member,  has been promoting this for 38 years.

Council noted the vast majority of non-smokers in the community, the positive reaction that they had heard and but two submissions against (update on those when they are available).

Well done Dan and council.

As I wrote in an earlier post:

In spite of a rabid few who want to ignore the over-riding health aspect of this initiative and beat the ‘invasion of personal rights’ drum, this is a great step forward.

Askews signThe city also approved the freestanding sign variance for Askews while defeating (a tie vote) the variance for a second informational sign on the vacant lot across from Setter’s Pub.

There wasn’t much (any?) support for my call for prioritizing regulating the implications  of digital signage. See Askew’s Request for Signage Variance – Some Expectations … for digital signage issues that other jurisdictions have regulated.

It was somewhat ironic to listen to the council conversation of the ‘precedence’ implications of permitting the smaller secondary (non-digital) informational signage while not really attaching any weight to the ‘precedence’ implications of not having adequate regulations in place for the digital signage coming down the pipe.

To reiterate, Askews is an important community-minded business and I agree with the variance. The politicos did miss an opportunity to establish some interim digital guidelines for what is now the 4th largest signage in the city. They seemed to dismiss the suggestion to get going on modernizing the signage bylaw.

My prediction: Increased chances of more one-off variances and a delayed inability to regulate for the next wave of digital signage that is going to crop up – much much sooner than later.

IMHO, it’s a quick and slippery slope to digital signage cacophony.

Little Mtn SignFinally, the city approved the third readings facilitating the Hartling/Little Mountain Park boundary restructuring. Again, a good move!

Author: Tim Lavery

Aim High Salmon Arm It matters

2 thoughts on “Dan’s Bylaw Prohibiting Smoking in City Parks …”

  1. And who/how is this no-smoking in public parks going to be enforced? I am all for no smoking in enclosed areas, but this is going too far. Reminds me of the signs along highways about $2000 fine for littering. Again…who is there to enforce it? Cameras? Or perhaps PRISM? Drones flying overhead?

Your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s