Moving/2169 Mission/challenges

From Noisebridge
Revision as of 13:40, 18 November 2010 by (talk | contribs) (Undo revision 14079 by (Talk) rm spam)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


There has been much discussion on the mailing list about various issues faced with moving to 2169 Mission. Please list the various issues you think that Noisebridge should address.

  • Lack of published budget showing we can afford this space with our existing run rate AND afford the required/desired upgrades?
  • is 2169 accessible to wheelchair users?
   "There is a freight elevator which goes from the street-level "lobby" to
    the third floor.  I don't know if it will comply with the letter of the
    law on ADA issues, but I do believe it will be practically useable to
    enable weelchair users to access the third floor." -from discuss list

I examined this myself. I'm not sure the call button on the ground floor is working properly, although I verified it to work on the 3rd floor. Regardless, there was a current inspection in the elevator as a passenger conveyance so it should technically comply. Christie

    • Building is built pre-ADA so has partial exemption. See [1] "3. When Was it Built? Why Does it Matter?" and [2]. CA law may be different, and doesn't address it as a practical/ethical question, just ADA-legal.
  • is the vermin problem (due to the greengrocery downstairs) large or small?
  • Can the wood floor support future heavy equipment?

Move in cost[edit]

Build-out cost[edit]

  • Numbers ranging 10-$50k have been voiced.
  • Remember this is a rental/lease. We don't recoup investment on buildouts as we would if we were to purchase & later sell a space. Money put into any rental is essentially lit on fire and tossed down a drain. While some work will invariably be needed to accommodate us wherever we end up; when renting it should be as close to meeting needs up front without major build outs; 83c additions were pretty much all optional & we were making use of the space immediately.
  • the property manager has alluded to the fact that no permit oriented improvements should be made lest it give cause for inspection, not only of 2169 but of other units in the building which may be in violation of code. Attempting to make improvments while keeping them tacit just sounds like it's asking for trouble and the repercussions of getting a whole building redtagged are not where we want to be. Let's not reimplement nimby 1.0 & the code violations that put them out of their space & the extensive funraising that was subsequently required for its reincarnation.

Long term cost[edit]

"It's a good deal in terms of $/sqft, so in that sense it's cheap. My question is simply whether we presently have the funds to commit to that extra 1.5k/mo for 3 years. It seems to me that the numbers since Dec 08 say 'no'; we'd be short ~$600/mo, esp. considering we'll have some outlay costs in renovation." -from discuss list

"it's very hard to predict whether expanding our space would lead to expanding membership as well. At current rates, the rent increase alone would require ~18 new members to be paid off." -from discuss list

  "We've been adding net 6 members per month for the last 3 months.
   Obviously past results are not a guarantee of future performance, but
   the signs are good.  We have an excellent member pipeline and dozens of
   prospects."-from discuss list
  • Real estate prices are continuing to drop; while no one is arguing that we shouldn't move to a new space; simply because we've found one that seems to meet our price/space requirements market logic dictates that there are only more to come. Waiting and exploring more options buys us more in the long term, particularly if we're confronted with 3-5 year leases.