T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
570.1 | ...damn great stickers get the message across!! | KERNEL::LOANE | Comfortably numb!! | Thu Jun 04 1992 23:06 | 10 |
| Publicise the fact that the practice is showing total lack of
thought and downright dangerous; wait a week for it to sink in and
then get some good labels to stick on their windscreens with
gobs'n'gobs of glue on the back.
I wish they'd do it here in Viables with the so-called Shift Car
Park; there'd be a few managers with red faces as well!! (oh, you DO
read this conference??!!) Last time I suggested it here, someone was
going to bring up the subject of "What constitutes a Shift worker??"
at some nebulous meeting, so nowt got done.
|
570.2 | Security guards stick the stickers | RDGENG::SJONES | Looking for inspiration | Fri Jun 05 1992 09:35 | 4 |
|
In DECpark, the security guards stick the stickers on the windscreen.
Steve
|
570.3 | Strange humps explained at last | LARVAE::SUGDEN | Schhhhhh....... | Fri Jun 05 1992 11:38 | 11 |
| There are even stranger things happening round the rear of the
Crescent. There are a set of yellow striped sleeping policemen. I
naively thought that these were there to get people to reduce their
speed and to test the suspension of cars belonging to sales staff.
However I now realise that I am wrong. Each of these humps is actually
there to indicate the presence of a strange sign that is concealed in
the shrubbery. These signs are barely visible at all when you drive
past but if you walk close to them you can just make out some strange
symbol looking vaguely like a plan view of a brassiere. I do not know
what they mean but certainly you would not see the signs at all unless
we had the humps to indicate where they are.
|
570.4 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Fri Jun 05 1992 13:29 | 16 |
|
Keith, before you think people are lazy when they park in these spaces,
have you ever thought that the reason they park there is because they
have been twice around the car park, and there are absolutely no
spaces left?
Last time I was in the Crescent I drove twice around the car park and
there were no car-spaces at all, and all road-spaces that may just be
possible to park in without major obstruction were also full.
I parked in one of the two free the disabled spaces, I told reception
where I was if the car needed to be moved.
My suggestion is to increase the ligitimate parking available.
Heather
|
570.5 | | SAC::EDMUNDS | Q1: cue for a holiday | Fri Jun 05 1992 16:56 | 5 |
| Yes, that thought did occur to me, people park "where they shouldn't"
LONG before the car park is full (which, although it may happen, is
very rare).
Keith
|
570.6 | | WELLIN::NISBET | Let me see that Hymn sheet ... | Tue Jun 09 1992 13:57 | 10 |
| Last time I was at the Crescent I parked half way up the side of a
hill, since it was the only place left. I had to take a bit of a run at
it mind you, bounced up the kerb, and stopped when the wheels stopped
gripping.
When I came back out some time later, the car had slid about 2 feet
down the hill. Give me a normal parking space anyday.
dj
|
570.7 | | LARVAE::CLEMENTS_D | | Mon Jul 13 1992 19:30 | 10 |
| Don't forget, folks that the design of the car parks was ordained by
some brain-the-size-of-a-planet deciding that, since Digital is heavily
into new working practices, there wasn't a need to provide every
occupier (or perhaps name on the occupants list) with a parking space.
I think that the ratio that was used was something like 2:3.
If you think that it is bad now, you should have been around during the
last couple of weeks of last FY when **EVERYBODY** was in at some time
trying to make sure that orders got booked and the admin got done to
ensure year-end bookings credits........
|
570.8 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Tue Jul 14 1992 09:52 | 15 |
|
> Don't forget, folks that the design of the car parks was ordained by
> some brain-the-size-of-a-planet deciding that, since Digital is heavily
> into new working practices, there wasn't a need to provide every
> occupier (or perhaps name on the occupants list) with a parking space.
> I think that the ratio that was used was something like 2:3.
I think you'll find that the building and car park were re-done exactly
as before - a condition of the insurance. And this was designed way
before the NWP.
What may be the case is that it houses more people than before. I
remember many unoccupied areas in the old Crescent.
Heather
|
570.9 | The long arm of the ........ | LARVAE::CLEMENTS_D | | Wed Jul 15 1992 00:25 | 8 |
| I hadn't realised that long arm of the insurance company extended as
far as control over the rebuilding..... did they specify that the
building was rebuilt as un-fireproof as before.....;-)...?
You are certainly right about the population density having been increased
with the MK II building.....
Dick.
|
570.10 | Insurance is for restoration | JANUS::BARKER | Jeremy Barker - CBN - Reading, UK | Wed Jul 15 1992 12:20 | 7 |
| Re: .9
The action of the insurance company is by no means unusual. After all,
the purpose of buildings insurance is to return the building to its
original state after it has been damaged.
jb
|
570.11 | Ooo..errr missus | LARVAE::HUTCHINGS_P | Manchester City | Wed Jul 15 1992 14:41 | 3 |
| complete with Fire Alarms that don't work properly..!!!
|
570.12 | There's only SO much land! | FUTURS::SAXBY | Working HERE? THAT'S the bonus?!?! | Wed Jul 15 1992 16:03 | 4 |
|
Where would you put extra car parking spaces then?
Mark
|
570.13 | | LARVAE::CLEMENTS_D | | Wed Jul 15 1992 23:19 | 4 |
| Perhaps there was an opportunity to build a subterranean car park
underneath the building?
D.
|
570.14 | $$$$$! | FUTURS::SAXBY | Working HERE? THAT'S the bonus?!?! | Thu Jul 16 1992 10:02 | 9 |
|
Umm, a possibility, but I reckon (not knowing anything about building
offices!) that the cost of putting a subterranean car park under the
building would have been astronomical in comparison to basically
rebuilding around the shell of the old Crescent (which, despite the
comments at the time, appears to be what they did - I never saw the
structure pulled down.)
Mark
|
570.15 | | AUSSIE::GARSON | | Fri Jul 17 1992 05:15 | 5 |
| How about re-marking the parking spaces to pack them in more densely?
That wouldn't cost too much. We're all buying smaller cars in these
environmentally conscious times, right? (-:
More car pooling?
|