To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 5028
5027  |  5029
Subject: 
Re: Due Process
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:16:10 GMT
Viewed: 
395 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:


"Scott E. Sanburn" wrote:

To All,

        I read a fascinating article in Design Systems about how restaurants
handle smoking / non smoking areas. Since I work in the Architectural /
Mechanical Engineering realm, most engineers design for certain CFM's
for certain areas, the smoking areas would naturally have more drawn out
for the smoke. However, once the contractor gets the prints, this is one
of the cost downs most contractors go for, the additional cost of the
smoking ductwork and exhaust. I guess in Liberatopia, a restaurant would
want to make sure the smoking and non smoking areas stay clear of each
other, and also have enough negative pressure to suck out the smoke.

I've always wondered if this was something that was implemented in the design
phase or after
the fact--it's interesting to hear the reality.  My uncle is an architect in
A^2 and has
built or remodeled private residences and public buildings since the 1970s,
and he's talked
about some of the shortcuts contractors may take in materials or techniques.
I had no idea,
however, that this was something the contractor could change unilaterally.  Is
it unilateral?

Hmm...in a Libertopia, wouldn't we then have to contend with additional
categories of
"smoke-friendliness" in places of business, given decriminilization and
deregulation of other
oft-smoked substances?  It's an interesting thought to roll around.
(Imagining, while typing
this, the ventilation equivalent of the Get Smart "cone of silence" descending

"Aaahh yes, the o l d cone of silence trick!"

over the
"marijuana section"...)  In Amsterdam, it seems to be handled with a place
being either
pot-friendly or not depending on its own declaration, but the places that are
also appear to
rely upon that as the claim-to-fame for their business, so it may not provide
an accurate
measure with respect to the hypothetical scenario.  (I've never gone into one,
so I can't
speak to the ventilation issue in practice.)

best

LFB

I was in Amsterdam in 89 and they have two Hard Rock Cafes - one for smokes and
one for drinks. My friends and I walked into the wrong one by mistake - which
being on active duty at the time could have been a big mistake - they didn't
seem to have *any* ventilation (which if you think about is the "perfect"
design for that type of establishment). The smoke was so thick you could barely
see, we all said we felt a little buzz after the few seconds we had been in
there. It was a very interesting experience.

Bill



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Due Process
 
(...) I've always wondered if this was something that was implemented in the design phase or after the fact--it's interesting to hear the reality. My uncle is an architect in A^2 and has built or remodeled private residences and public buildings (...) (25 years ago, 17-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

139 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR