Quote Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto View Post
Sure, why look beyond 10 years? I mean, buildings don't last that long anyway, right?

Are you including or excluding the taxes that a renovated building would pay? What about increased property values? Do those play in anywhere, or do you just look at immediate short-term results to do your long-term planning?



Tough to say, kraig, when DEGC refuses to hire an engineer in order to obtain objective data on which to base a decision. That's the entire problem--all these dollar figures [[other than the demo costs) are made up until a scope of work is defined. It's a lot easier to make the simple-minded decision than to have to actually think, or deal with *gasp* unknowns.
You do understand that mothballing a building isn't the same as renovating a building? The City wouldn't make money off of just mothballing the building.

Having an engineer look at a building for the unknowns is very critical, there's no denying that. But, when the knowns are already telling you it's cheaper to demolish, it may be a waste of time and resources to consult with an engineer. The DEGC knows that demolition will cost 1.4 million. From the DEGC's standpoint, it's a waste of time to consult with an engineer when they know that the engineer is not going to come back with a cost of mothballing the building for less than that. As an engineer, wouldn't you be suspect of any engineer that did come back with an amount that's lower than the 1.4 million? Furthermore, the cost of a qualified engineer to take even a cursory look would be somewhere in the five figure range and probably six figures for the detailed look that would be necessary. As an experienced engineer, do you think that there is a reputable firm out there that would tell the DEGC it would cost less than 1.4 million to repair the building and seal it up?

RSA, please feel free to answer that question too. And remember, GP and RSA, your credibility is on the line here. Everyone is going to see through any emotional BS answers.