Philly is smoke-free...finally

[Jeff L]

At long last, Philadelphia City Council has approved a smoking ban in all restaurants except private clubs. Also potentially exempt are bars that can demonstrate their total food gross is less than 10%. I have no problem with this exception and really don't mind people smoking in bars in general. What I do find offensive is being around smoke while I'm eating. Now if I'm out at a music club, well that's just part of the scene and I don't mind it there either.

Interestingly, the ban, which starts on Jan 1st 2007, limits smoking to 20 feet from an establishments front door. I always hold my breath when entering a public building where smokers are lined up outside the door to avoid the wall of smoke. But how is one supposed to know that particular place is deemed smoke-free when they are 20 feet away?

Are we happy about this? Comments?

[phungi]

At long last, indeed... I'm sure the smokers will cry about restricting their personal rights, but I am happy that come January, Philly will join cities like San Fran and New York and I will no longer have to dine or drink among the nasty filthy cigarette smoke...

I hope that many establishments will start early, a'la Starr.

[mrbigjas]

personally i'm just hoping that whatever happens with this, i won't be subject to the same annoying, shrill, tired arguments yet again about the subject. we've all heard them before, a thousand times, when NY banned, when CA banned (twice!), when NJ banned, when boston banned, when Ireland banned, when Italy banned...

in fact, i promise that if the debate on whether or not this is a good thing starts yet again, i will argue against both sides vehemently.

at the same time.

[Jaymes]

Perhaps, in the interest of brevity, folks that are tempted to join in here with their same arguments, could just link to their exact same posts on one of those several other threads.

Edited June 16, 2006 by Jaymes (log)

[Vadouvan]

How about we just forget it, It's a done deal

I'm with Mr Big, either side cannot exactly do anything about it now.

Just deal with it.

[Greg Salisbury]

I do appreciate Councilman DeCicco's amendment to protect local taverns: 90% of your biz comes from alcohol, you get to keep the cancercausers. As a nonsmoker, I reflexively want a complete ban, but it's good to be realistic and protective of existing local businesses. I'm just curious to see how long it takes before people find the loopholes.

[Mummer]

... 90% of your biz comes from alcohol,

... I'm just curious to see how long it takes before people find the loopholes.

←

But I want to be open on Sunday because over 30% of my business comes from food. Looks like it's time for a Philadelphia lawyer.

[aaronwcpa]

It's about time that Phildelphia City Council showed some sense. Most small, quality restaurants have been nonsmoking for many years. Exempting bars makes good sense but if food is served there should be a separate room for nonsmokers to enjoy the food, if they so wish.

[davidbdesilva]

I am on both sides of this issue, very literally. When I go out to eat I don't want to dine with smoke whatsoever so I'm glad about that. But being a cigar smoker, which is ten times as restrictive as cigarette smoking to begin with, there will literally be no where to smoke them (except perhaps places like Mahogony on Walnut where one pays exorbidant prices for drinks). Alas, gone will be my (and my wife's) favorite place to smoke a cigar and have a drink: sitting in the lobby of the Ritz Carlton at a candle-lit table while Miles and Sinatra plays and while my smoke wafts straight up to the 80-foot ceilings and bothers no one (sigh ). Also caught in the middle will be places like The Drafting Room, which has one side which is a restaurant and serves food in a smoke-free environmet and the other side which is a bar and allows smoking (including cigars). Being well over the 10% food limit (on both sides) they will obviously have to ban smoking on both sides, not giving people a choice. As with all mandates such as this, there are always pro's and con's.

Edited June 17, 2006 by davidbdesilva (log)

[Holly Moore]

I'm just curious to see how long it takes before people find the loopholes.

←

Flambe everything. 100% alcohol sales.

[SaxChik]

I am on both sides of this issue, very literally. When I go out to eat I don't want to dine with smoke whatsoever so I'm glad about that. But being a cigar smoker, which is ten times as restrictive as cigarette smoking to begin with, there will literally be no where to smoke them (except perhaps places like Mahogony on Walnut where one pays exorbidant prices for drinks). Alas, gone will be my (and my wife's) favorite place to smoke a cigar and have a drink: sitting in the lobby of the Ritz Carlton at a candle-lit table while Miles and Sinatra plays and while my smoke wafts straight up to the 80-foot ceilings and bothers no one (sigh  ).  Also caught in the middle will be places like The Drafting Room, which has one side which is a restaurant and serves food in a smoke-free environmet and the other side which is a bar and allows smoking (including cigars). Being well over the 10% food limit (on both sides) they will obviously have to ban smoking on both sides, not giving people a choice. As with all mandates such as this, there are always pro's and con's.

←

i wonder, if it's just in philadelphia and not the burbs (doesn't seem like it's statewide), then the drafting room shoudl be safe (for now).

[herbacidal]

I'm against, because I don't think it was the government's place to decide for all restaurants and bars. The >10% business exception is of small solace.

My personal solution was for the city to have all restaurants and bars apply for 1 of 2 licenses: 1 for smoking, 1 for nonsmoking.

If your business isn't profitable enough under one license, you can re-apply for the the other one.

Red banner or blue banner next to the front door of each establishment indicating which license it has.

Ideally, 50% of the restaurants and bars would have each kind of license, and the percentage would shift based on market demand for each side.

[mrbigjas]

... 90% of your biz comes from alcohol,

... I'm just curious to see how long it takes before people find the loopholes.

←

But I want to be open on Sunday because over 30% of my business comes from food. Looks like it's time for a Philadelphia lawyer.

←

totally--i wonder how that's gonna play out.

[Rich Pawlak]

I am on both sides of this issue, very literally. When I go out to eat I don't want to dine with smoke whatsoever so I'm glad about that. But being a cigar smoker, which is ten times as restrictive as cigarette smoking to begin with, there will literally be no where to smoke them (except perhaps places like Mahogony on Walnut where one pays exorbidant prices for drinks). Alas, gone will be my (and my wife's) favorite place to smoke a cigar and have a drink: sitting in the lobby of the Ritz Carlton at a candle-lit table while Miles and Sinatra plays and while my smoke wafts straight up to the 80-foot ceilings and bothers no one (sigh  ).  Also caught in the middle will be places like The Drafting Room, which has one side which is a restaurant and serves food in a smoke-free environmet and the other side which is a bar and allows smoking (including cigars). Being well over the 10% food limit (on both sides) they will obviously have to ban smoking on both sides, not giving people a choice. As with all mandates such as this, there are always pro's and con's.

←

The smoking ban covers Philly so far, David, but not Montco or Bucks or Delco or Chesco, for that matter.....

[davidbdesilva]

I realized that it probably wouldn't apply to the 'burbs after I posted Rich, but thanks for the clarification. I'm sure it will spread to the 'burbs and then perhaps statewide after a while. I just think that extremes, in whatever format, are usually just that, extreme, and not the way to go. I'm sure one could take such a ban to an even more extreme conclusion in which my neighbor could have me banned from smoking cigars on my front porch or backyard because they are inhaling my second-hand smoke - not implausible.

I wonder if "private" little places like The Vault at the Ritz or The Library Lounge at the Bellevue (or whatever it is now) will be spared or have to close down? I just hope there are SOME options available for me to enjoy a fine cigar and scotch after all is said and done.

[Rich Pawlak]

I realized that it probably wouldn't apply to the 'burbs after I posted Rich, but thanks for the clarification. I'm sure it will spread to the 'burbs and then perhaps statewide after a while. I just think that extremes, in whatever format, are usually just that, extreme, and not the way to go. I'm sure one could take such a ban to an even more extreme conclusion in which my neighbor could have me banned from smoking cigars on my front porch or backyard because they are inhaling my second-hand smoke - not implausible.

I wonder if "private" little places like The Vault at the Ritz or The Library Lounge at the Bellevue (or whatever it is now) will be spared or have to close down? I just hope there are SOME options available for me to enjoy a fine cigar and scotch after all is said and done.

←

Well lets get to the Drafting Room for a ceegar or two ---and some killer beers---real soon then!

[Bobby 2 Shakes]

I'll settle for some smoked foie, while it's still available.

[davidbdesilva]

Sounds good to me Rich and I'll always supply the stogies! Even my lovely little wife is becoming more of a beer drinker, enjoying Belgian Hefleweizen's and loving Framboise Lambic's (AND smoking my cigars! Well remember, she IS half Cuban afterall).