1 posted on
04/30/2002 12:17:43 AM PDT by
sarcasm
To: sarcasm
I'd be boiling cabbage and onions 24/7.
To: sarcasm
A better answer would be to set up the "smoking" apartments with exhaust ventilation, and to improve the sealing around plumbing, etc. in all apartments, so as to curtail seepage. The apartment I last lived in had a lot of seepage from my smoking neighbors. It was enough to be annoying. Duct tape around the plumbing at the walls helped.
To: sarcasm
A better answer would be to set up the "smoking" apartments with exhaust ventilation, and to improve the sealing around plumbing, etc. in all apartments, so as to curtail seepage.
Woops they appear to have tried that. Maybe they need a better HVAC engineer. It's largely a matter of air pressure differences. If the nonsmoking apartments could be slightly pressurized and the smoking apartments the opposite, the problem would probably disappear.
To: sarcasm
How the hell will they police this rule?
Sounds like George Orwell's 1984.
7 posted on
04/30/2002 12:56:48 AM PDT by
cavador
To: sarcasm
Part of the problem is that you're never certain which apartment smoke may be coming from.I see an opportunity for mischief.
Hehehe,,,
11 posted on
04/30/2002 3:01:04 AM PDT by
metesky
To: sarcasm
Co-ops and condos -- as far as I can tell, they have the downsides of renting and owning and the benefits of neither.
13 posted on
04/30/2002 3:17:48 AM PDT by
maryz
To: sarcasm
Let's see now.
Forbidding an otherwise legal activity of no
proven danger or detriment to others...
I hope that they have a good litigation reserve.
I am surprised these morons didn't make it retroactive.
Supposing they created a ban on anyone over 300 pounds with a body odor problem?
To: sarcasm
At the margin, this lowers the value of all apartments in the building because it narrows the pool of potential buyers, even though high-income smokers are a tiny sliver of the co-op buying public.
It is also a red flag to realtors and all buyers that this building's board is laden with intrusive wack jobs.
I'm on the board of my building, and if you can pay for the flat, have a steady flow of income to pay the maintenence, don't seem prone to throwing lots of noisy parties, and don't have more than one head, you're in.
To: sarcasm
"But Mr. Saft, the co-op's lawyer, said the board had surveyed real estate brokers and concluded that the rules might act as a "marketing tool for people who want to raise their children in a smoke-free environment." There you have it.. it's for the chilluns.
To: sarcasm
Its a shame. That's a nice neighborhood too. I guess they wouldn't want me stinking up the place with my Partagas or Davidoff of the day.
NicoNazis make me sick.
20 posted on
04/30/2002 7:22:04 AM PDT by
Clemenza
To: sarcasm
If it's a private entity, I don't have a problem with it. If it's govt, then the officials behind it should be tarred and feathered.
To: sarcasm
The board's president, Scott Wechsler, a real estate lawyer, said the co-op had faced problems with smoking for several years. "We've had shareholders complain that they smell smoke coming through the vents," As I've been saying all along, the more people we pack into this country, the more often will people be stepping on each other's toes.
Good fences may make good neighbors, but plenty of space between people makes even better neighbors.
Of course, after we pack the whole world's population into Texas (as Rush Lumbaugh says we can), expect non-smoking, non-barbecuing, non-fireplaces, non-crabgrass, non-music playin, non-clotheslines, non this and non that regulations and LAWS and Government to multiply.
Of course, such crowding would not be a problem--except for immigration.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson