vault backup: 2026-05-11 17:29:33
This commit is contained in:
@@ -6,8 +6,9 @@ daily: "[[2026-05-11]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-05-11 10:57:45
|
||||
|
||||
[[cincinnati-convention-center-hotel]]
|
||||
Relevant to [[electrical-takeoff]]
|
||||
for [[cincinnati-convention-center-hotel]]:
|
||||
|
||||
Receptacle with filled center bar
|
||||
(almost always used to indicate counter height mounting)
|
||||
(usually used to indicate counter height mounting)
|
||||
is used to indicate integral ground fault protection.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: 2026-05-11T12:45:06-0400
|
||||
title: 2026-05-11 12:45:06
|
||||
tags: []
|
||||
daily: "[[2026-05-11]]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
# 2026-05-11 12:45:06
|
||||
|
||||
## Multi-branded Hotels
|
||||
|
||||
Notes on [[penner_2013_hotel-design#Chapter 5 Multi-branded Hotels]]:
|
||||
|
||||
Multi-branded hotels first appeared
|
||||
as separate buildings on a shared parcel
|
||||
with shared amenity spaces,
|
||||
then later as a single building.
|
||||
|
||||
### Critique of Listed Advantages of Multi-branded Hotels
|
||||
|
||||
By my reading,
|
||||
the only _inherent_ advantage of multi-branded hotels
|
||||
is the shared investment.
|
||||
|
||||
Many of those listed in the text break down
|
||||
when considered in comparison to a single-brand hotel
|
||||
of size equal to the multi-brand in question.
|
||||
|
||||
> * Meeting space becomes more cost-effective.
|
||||
> A ballroom might not be feasible to build and operate for one hotel alone
|
||||
> but when shared by two, it becomes viable.
|
||||
|
||||
I suppose this makes sense if compared to the case
|
||||
that the parcel was split between the two brands
|
||||
and each built entirely separate facilities adjacent to each other,
|
||||
but that just doesn't seem realistic.
|
||||
|
||||
Or maybe you're a hotel brand exec
|
||||
deciding on the next construction project
|
||||
and you really need another ballroom
|
||||
but your budget for construction wouldn't normally allow it.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user