My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Space Planning (Departments)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Space Planning (Departments)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:12:23 AM
Creation date
8/18/2011 5:07:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10288
Title
Space Planning (Departments)
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Design - Planning
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
From: DON WOODLEY <br />To: CLUEDEMAN <br />Date: 11/6/97 12:35pm <br />Subject: COURT HOUSE SQUARE, SPACE ALLOCATION <br />Craig <br />Building Inspection Division is presently occupying 6500 sq. ft.. The proposed space <br />allowance for us downtown is 8500 sq. ft. net usable space. A new calculation method is now <br />being used which requires us to pay rent based on gross sq. ft. basis. The difference between <br />the hnro is approximately 13% or 9600 sq. ft.. Because of the increase in both the monthly rate <br />and area to which the calculation is applied, we must reduce our net area to 7500 sq. ft.. That <br />area will accommodate us at this time and should expansion be necessary, we will use <br />alternate methods such as satellite offices and tele-commuting. <br />I support the proposed funding by MCHA because of the lower proposed rental rate. I believe <br />that it is in the best interest of this division and our customers, to explore alternative methods <br />of dealing with future expansion needs. Since our required staffing levels will fluctuate with the <br />economy and we are vulnerable to the loss of contract work with the cities, the conservative <br />approach is warranted. The current proposal using gross sq. ft. and 8500 sq. ft. represents <br />$40,000 annual increase in cost. That is a staff position that we can not do without. The <br />MCHA proposal could reduce that increase by $20,000, a worth while reduction, but we should <br />also reduce the sq. ft. to the minimum necessary at this time. <br />CC: MGMT STAFF <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.