CCP 01-22-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Each a.l ternativ€ v ar i e s the construe t i 0(1 cost v,lh i 1 e maintaining the other assumptions outl ined above. Scenar i D C,I as-sume 5 tha t . the Ci ty wi 11 use force account maintenance forces and not assign those costs to occupancy accounts. I t also e1 imi na.tes a funded replacement res.erve and assumes these expendi tures ,,-'i 11 come from ope-rat i ng funds, special funds or bonding. Alternative Construct i on Co'.::-1:/5.F. Al t A '$70.07 A It B '$65.92 Al t C '$60.43 Typ i c a 1 occupancy costs for suburb.:.1n office buildin'~s could be summarized as fall OlJ.,!S: Item AnnlJa 1 Co-::.t/3. F. Rea 1 Estate Tax e s $1 .50 Insurance .07 Utilities 1.15 R e p air s/~I a i n ten an c e .33 Janitorial .64 General ~~ t"1anagemen t .45 Rep I acemen ts/AI tera t ions ~~ ,..:oL TOTAL OCCUPAi'ICY COST $4.46 The r e su I t of each of the al ternatives under the stated a'5'5>umptlons is tha. t the oVJnership op t i on has a. higher in j t i 3.1 annual ~ost , 1 ar ge 1 y because of the addi tional sp ace and . functions provided. Given no time value for money and i nfl at i on proj ec t'i'on-::., an n u a I costs become less f '=,r oliJners.h i p in 2001 . If maintenance costs and repl a.cement reserves t/,IE' r E' not assigrlE'd to the budge t, ol).lner~h j p 'J-Jou] d becorne more cos'l: effec t i IJe 2.nnuall)' after 191'5. The alternatives A-C under the tot a 1 f j nanc j ng assumption reflect a. hi ghe't" accumu1ated a.nnual cost for the 20 year period in comparison to the lease 21.1 ternat i I..H? AI ternate C .1 shows less accumulated C05'1: than th e lease op t i on when ma in tena.nce and replacement reserlJE'S are deducted. On the 21,;,;. t year the occupancy costs V,IOU 1 d drop dr ama tic all y for the ownership option with the retirement of the bond. Also, at the end of the 20 )'€' -Ca.r period, the ass.€' t waul d have 1.)3, 1 ue undfr the ownership op t i on compared to the 1 ease option. . D-4 ,. -