Storage rules

[orion]

Here are the proposed rules for comment.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dJLjtZAJyQpwB9cNtb1i4i1K92gOmZcGbjbeMloNQoQ/edit

[George Gelly]

Perhaps we should consider a "tiered" storage system where a bin is free with membership but there is a cost (in monthly increments) for certain amounts of space used?

[orion]

Have thought about that but the concern with money for storage is when a project has overstayed its welcome. How do you deal with something that takes up %20 of the floor space but is not being worked on but paid for every month. As a whole having the churn in storage for new projects to come in is better than the money from stagnant projects taking space.

[H Kazemi]

If one can fairly clearly define what it means for project to be active vs. inactive/stagnant/parked, the following ideas may offer a solution.  Of course there also needs to be a way to administer whatever solution is selected. The general idea is a per-project storage space pricing structure that is tiered over time. This would be a way to address the concern that was raised about stagnant projects.

Here are two models based on the following criteria:
-members should get some project space included as a member benefit.
-space has a measurable value, especially if it is in short supply.
-project churn is desired, with 6 months as the default limit per project.
-the model should not (strongly) favor smaller, long term projects (small, slow churn) at the expense of bigger but rapid projects (big, but rapid churn). Fairness is needed between them.
-the goal is to maximize the number of completed projects per unit of space per unit of time.

This first model does encourage smaller projects, with a bit of a drag on larger projects. Any that run over time limit quickly start to become expensive.
The numbers below assign a value to square footage with a goal of encouraging project churn as well as smaller projects. The prices are simply placeholders. They aren't based on anything. (FWIW, last I looked, mini storage lockers are in $1-$2/sf/month range in the Twin Cities.)

Month, Fee per unit of storage space (e.g. square foot of floor or cubic foot)
1st month, first 10sf free, $0.10/sf above 10.
2nd month, first 10sf free, $0.10/sf above 10.
3rd month, ""
4th month, ""
5th month, ""
6th month, ""
7th month, $0.10/sf for all space.
8th month, $0.25/sf for all space.
9th month, $0.50/sf for all space.
Etc, or something similar.
Or just add $0.10/sf every additional month beyond 6 until project is completed/removed/deemed abandoned.

Second model:
This is meant to properly balance (small, slow churn) and bigger but rapid projects (big, but rapid churn) and everything in between like growing projects. This uses the concept of a Space-Month Unit, which is just a certain amount of space that is held for a month. Each member gets a certain amount of Space-Month Units (SMU) for each project they are working on.

Assuming 10 sf for an average project, with a 6 month limit, each project thus gets 10*6=60 SMU by default. (Members may also request approval for more than 60 SMU for a project if they can justify the request.)
(Note: It may or may not be necessary to define a limit on simultaneous projects. This might be a membership-level thing or a permission request/grant thing, based on current space demands.

Process:
Member starts a new project (fills out project info form).
Member is granted 60 SMU for project. This is written on project form.
Member begins project.
At end of month, amount of space (floor s.f. or volume c.f.) currently consumed by project is deducted from remaining SMU for that project. (Presumably any member can view/record this info when each recording interval comes up. Auditing is via peers as needed.) When remaining SMU balance reaches zero, project now incurs idling fees for each additional month it is present.

Example of what could be written on project sheet for a 10 sf project.
Time 0: 60 SMU allocated
End of month 1: 10 sf used, deduct 10 SMU, 50 SMU remaining
End of month 2: 10 sf used, deduct 10 SMU, 40 SMU remaining
End of month 3: 10 sf used, deduct 10 SMU, 30 SMU remaining
End of month 4: 10 sf used, deduct 10 SMU, 20 SMU remaining
End of month 5: 10 sf used, deduct 10 SMU, 10 SMU remaining
End of month 6: 10 sf used, deduct 10 SMU, 0 SMU remaining
End of month 7: 10 sf used, 0 SMU balance, apply fee of $0.10/sf
End of month 8: 10 sf used, 0 SMU balance, apply fee of $0.25/sf
End of month 9: 10 sf used, 0 SMU balance, apply fee of $0.50/sf

Example of what could be written on project sheet for a bigger 30 sf project.
Time 0: 60 SMU allocated
End of month 1: 30 sf used, deduct 30 SMU, 30 SMU remaining
End of month 2: 30 sf used, deduct 30 SMU, 0 SMU remaining
End of month 3: 30 sf used, 0 SMU balance, apply fee of $0.10/sf
End of month 4: 30 sf used, 0 SMU balance, apply fee of $0.25/sf
End of month 5: 30 sf used, 0 SMU balance, apply fee of $0.50/sf

Continue escalating until project is completed/removed/deemed abandoned.

The second model is fairer and easier to administer in that it can be handled right on a project sheet. Time extensions would be granted by issuing additional SMUs to a project. Those SMUs would come from SMUs that would have otherwise been granted to new projects.

Total SMUs possible depend on amount of space available for project storage. If there are 1000 square feet in the building for project storage, per the definition of 1 SMU per square foot per month, that is up to 1000 new SMUs that can be issued to projects each month. 1000/60=16.7 simultaneous 60 sf big quick projects done each month. Or 1000/10=100 smaller 10 sf projects done each month. Or a mix. Projects that were overtime and incurring fees or had been granted extensions would reduce the SMUs available for issuing to new projects.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tcmaker" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tcmaker+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[orion]

That would be an administrative nightmare, someone would have to track all of that data. I think comparing to storage facilities is not the right direction, one they have preset enclosed spaces so they don't have to measure. The model depends on the space being consumed for long periods of time and is priced accordingly. Just to keep even with cost the space it would have to be $.50/sf to start.

[Chris Gallaty]

I think if this where as easy as 'charge people' this would be open and shut. The issue is, it's not. We have a finite amount of space to deal with and any space that gets devoted to storage is active space that a member could be working in. The sad bit is that since I've been coming to the Space, the area we have has increased by leaps and bounds. The issue is that the cruft that has grown up around the sides has expanded to fill any space we've acquired. There is a balance here and I think it needs to be that the size of the project needs to have an *inverse* relation to the length of the project. i.e. If you are building something really big in the wood shop, that needs to be something that you are focusing on and getting to in a few days, smaller projects get more reasonable to store, but at a certain point, you have to ask yourself why you are not just packing things out. I've seen other places that have clean, standardized bins that they allocate to folks, and yes, it saves space, but there is also the issue of folks storing things there that they should not. We don't have 24/7 staff and leaving tools (unless you have donated them to the Space proper) gets to be an issue of the potential of things walking off.) I don't think we want a policy that encourages folks to just leave things at the space. It's frustrating. I've got a bunch of cedar in my garage that I would love to be able to drop off at the Space and pop over and work on it as I need a larger vehicle to do that and I don't normally drive that. I just don't know if/when I can get over there. It's not fair to take up the space of something that is actively working on a project and using the space. If everyone felt that we, we likely would not need a stricter policy, but I think the 'goodwill' of the group has been abused a few times on the storage side of the equation. 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tcmaker+u...@googlegroups.com.

[Kelly Murphy]

I'm looking at storage rules from the standpoint of "Be Excellent to one another"

As Chris has pointed out, no mater how much storage space we acquire, it eventually get's filled to overflowing with a bunch of stuff that never moves.  We could triple the storage space and in 6 months, it would be overflowing with 4 times the stuff that still; never moves.

We won't be doing any kind of complicated accounting based on sq/ft used over time or even charging people for normal storage. That involves way too much overhead and is not being excellent to those managing the space.

Their is a problem with people taking advantage of storage at the shop. ie "I might work on this every now and then and since there's a shelf not being used, I'll just leave it in storage in case I feel like taking it out for one hour every 3 weeks and look at it. then decide no, I'm not going to do this now." and put it back on the shelf where it's been for the past 2 years.  

That's not being excellent to the rest of the members of the shop. Someone else may have something they actively want to do but have been putting it off because there's no place to keep it at the shop even though it'll only take 2 (actual calendar)weeks to complete.  

So the question is how do we manage the space we have more effectively.  We've tried the parking permit/ticket approach, It kind of worked, but people just come in and vaguely put a permit on a rough pile of stuff that flows randomly with no border so nobody can tell what is/isn't meant to be on that permit. Others just flag a shelf(or 2) as theirs, never actually work on anything on the shelf, and update the permit every 3 months.  Some of the things on the shelves now have been there since we put the shelves in.  That's not being excellent to others either. 

I think the way we manage the storage space more effectively really comes down to actually managing the storage space and not allowing it to be a free for all.  

We as a community have grown to a point where a fundamental change in the attitude of storage needs to happen. The mentality that "this is storage space for all the things one might get to one day" doesn't work anymore. We need to think of storage at the shop as "This is short term storage for stuff actively being built/repaired at the shop but then goes home with you"

Being excellent to each other means only storing things you are actively working on so others can store stuff they are actively working on as well.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tcmaker+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Jonathan Alt]

Below are your same rules - condensed to two pages instead of three (removed same rule being mentioned multiple times - reorganized it so it is easier to see the storage requirements)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PKj9J6o1q-ZfLFZe0TU3IcxCI9FaJX2GeRtNu8QKcZg/edit?usp=sharing

On Friday, September 30, 2016 at 10:31:55 PM UTC-5, orion wrote:

[Jer Davis]

Perhaps this is getting overly complicated, but can we use technology to try to help with management of this?

Every member has a dongle to get into the shop. If we could associate that to their storage, we could start to understand active vs inactive projects and members. 

Bob is starting a project and doesn't have anything in storage. Bob brings in a bin or buys one from TCMaker for his project.

Bob goes to the storage kiosk/computer and creates a project, giving a bit of info about what he's working on and storing. A label with a barcode gets printed identifying that storage unit. Bob sticks the label on the inside of the lid and goes about his day.

When Bob comes into the shop he uses his dongle to get in, identifying that he's entered the shop (assuming we can connect the two systems). If not, he swings past the storage kiosk and waves his dongle at that to register he's working on a project. It's been a week or two since his last visit, so he takes the lid to the kiosk and scans it, updating the status of that storage container.

Bob stops coming in for a long time. The system registers no activity, either by presence (entering building or dongle at the kiosk) or by updating his project status (scanning the lid). Too much time is past and his project is flagged inactive. He gets an automatic email letting him know that if he needs to either get working on his project or collect it. If he fails to do so in a set amount of time his project will be flagged for removal.

- This could work for bins and for larger space allocations, but for a larger allocation you may need to interact with an authority at the shop to approve the space and designate the location within the building. You'd stick your project label to a tag or something rather than the bin lid.

- At quarterly cleanup, or whenever really, someone of authority could print a list of projects requiring removal. They can locate the projects and dispose of them accordingly. To make location easier we could print two labels, the one with the bar code and one with a larger simple identifier that they'd be required to put on the front of the bin. If we wanted to get more elaborate we could ask that they specify the shelf the bin is stored on in the project details to make locating it easier.

- If we wanted to get more complicated we could potentially expose an outside interface for updating your project details. Using that alone wouldn't allow you to keep your project active. However if your project was flagged as inactive we could offer the ability to extend it for short periods of time by paying a fee/fine. So a member wouldn't lose their project if life was preventing them from getting in to work on or remove it by the next deadline.

Of course, no system is free. This puts less management overhead on the volunteers running it over time, but would require some amount of work to set up initially. 

[Jonathan Alt]

To Kelly's point: I think the way we manage the storage space more effectively really comes down to actually managing the storage space and not allowing it to be a free for all.


I honestly don't think we need to change the rules...the current rules just need to be enforced by someone.

Only add I would make to current rules concerns large item storage - I love the deposit idea - but make it mandatory...not up to the discretion of the person managing the area (fair play for all!)

[Kelly Murphy]

The thought of the discretion of the management is that it depends on the size of the item, if we are talking about a car, truck, camper, art-house/shanty, etc type large item, sure we will want a deposit.  If it’s a medium sized item like a dresser, Tardis, cement 3d printer.  That probably won’t need a deposit.  

 

So by “Large Item” we mean something that will either occupy a parking spot, or excessive amount of ground/floor space at or in the shop.  

It’s not based on the item, or the person, it would be based solely on the size.  To your point, We should define in more detail what items will require a deposit, ie any item that exceeds any of the following dimensions (HxWxL) or be stored outside, will require a deposit.

 

The change in the rules is that space will be allocated on a first come first serve request basis. Not first come first serve as in the shelfs empty and I’m claiming it forever as I was here first.

 

Example: (assumes shelves are all allocated and requests are processed as received)

User A requests a space to store an item to begin oct 15^th for 30 days and is granted Shelf A1.

User B requests a space on Oct 30^th, to start November 16^th for 30 days, and the only shelf that will be available starting then is A1, User B is granted shelf A1 for November 16^th through December 16^th.

                User A then requests an extension of shelf on Nov 1 but is told that the shelf is not available, but shelf B5 will be available on November 27^th and can have that shelf for 30 days.  User A must remove his stored item on shelf A1 on Nov 15^th, but can bring it back and put it on shelf B5 on November 27^th.

 

I believe we can do this with a database fairly easily, or even with a Spreadsheet until we can come up with an app to manage it.

--

[George Gelly]

I really like where this is all going: keep the administration to a manageable level, but make it clear that using TCMaker space as long-term storage (or even poor storage) is now going to be enforced with clear definitions and penalties.

[George Gelly]

One additional thing to consider is the "attitude" we have for making any kind of Storage Policy "transition".

Specifically, we have what appears to be 10 to 15 members (or former members) that have large stashes of supplies, projects, specialized piece of equipment, of display items (or even an area they have staked-out for "their" tools)... and these members may not have a place for these things to "go" once we change policies.  The conflict I see coming is that TC Makers as an organization would view these stashes as "negative value" (getting in the way), while the member sees positive value in the collection.  This would create an immediate conflict that will cause bad feelings if not handled properly and we certainly want to keep these valuable members participating in the organization.

I wanted to put forward the idea that TC Makers, as an organization, should view anything in the space as having value and treat the member (and their stuff) in the transition as such.

Translating that to action could suggest a few options:

1) We need to identify the known equipment in the shop (specifically specialized/low-use/demonstration items) and to which location/area it is assigned... so we can make sure these items either:

    a) belong to the shop, have a designated department that manages them, and has documented user instructions with 2, or more, "experts" on it's use, or

    b) are identified with a specific member and a "marked off" floor space, where instructions are clearly posted (and followed) on "sharing" arrangements (this arrangement should be agreed to by the board on a case-by-case basis)

2) TC Maker could find an "out of space" location (could be next door... but NOT accessible to anyone beyond the Storage Manager) where we relocate "suspect" items for a designated period of time (say 90 days).  We post a list of the "off site" items and if the item is not checked-out for work in that period of time, the member will have 30-days to find an alternative disposition (like craigslist or ebay) for the item(s) or TC Makers will dispose of them.

3) The Storage Manager could have a budget to use on a case-by-case basis to assist members with finding off-site storage and/or transportation for larger caches of items.

The key here, in my mind, would be to have the best intentions and compassion for members that may be forced to deal with their "inner hoarder" as a result of any transition in TC Maker storage policy.  Members may not have a place for their "things of value" to go and would have bad feelings for TC Makers if we "forced" them to follow a policy for which they have no good solutions (i.e. finding a place for their stuff).

[orion]

"10 to 15 members (or former members) that have large stashes of supplies, projects, specialized piece of equipment" are why we need new rules. Tool identification has been needed for a while but there are only so many hours in the day. We are likely not going to do offsite storage for member stuff as that is a cost to everyone. offsite for things we want to keep but dont have a good place for yet may be an option. 

As for no good options, just because you can't keep something at home should not give you license to abuse a shared resource. 

As for how this will roll out i believe a day will be announced and on that day the storage will be cleared of all projects, the shelf's reset to accommodate our needs. When its set back up, only projects conforming to the new ruleset will be admitted. When member storage is loaded again, we should work on woodshop to get it marked and shelved, metal to follow, then the area in front of storage.

[Sebastian Wiers]

The only thing I can think to con tribute to this regards the standard
sized container concept. I'd suggest that if you want that to be
reliably implemented, it would much more effective to segmentize the
shelving itself with appropriate partitions. This also lends itself
well to tracking of who is using what storage, as you then effectively
have "storage lockers", even if they are open fronted, and each one
could have a pocket for information about member who is using it,
dates, etc, or / and could be tracked in a (publicly accessible)
spreadsheet. This also avoids the need for (and likely failure of)
members making special shopping trips to purchase containers.

With just the "standardized container", storage remains a
theoretically unlimited resource that more and more containers could
be packed into, and into which non-containerized items will inevitably
be put.

The obvious downside of this would be that items that don't fit in the
storage segments can't be stored on the shelves... but maybe that's an
UPSIDE, since it physically enforces the requirement for special
storage?

Obviously, we also have storage for materials, tools, etc, but I
assume that is per shop area managers.

And, as a side note, sorry I missed the last cleanup, I was enjoying
the Apocalypse in California, riding historic on the fury road. If
its still there, I'll be in to pick up the rest of the stuff I had in
storage and clean it out entirely (something I'd been working at in
small lots), because all my projects are currently in the "work at
home" state.

- Seb

[David Schuett]

I believe the already in place rule of one container per person will stay in effect.

As for your projects, we didn't even get to member storage on cleanup.

[Jonathan Alt]

To George's Point - Notifying and Advertising that projects/materials need to be moved out in 60 days will go a LONG way in making this easier on people who have small cars/no where else to store things.  It will also give non-members opportunity to get in on Wed during Open house to get stuff they might have forgotten in storage.

I would suggest advertising this "clean out by date" by the end of the week so people can start preparing for this now!


PS.
I love the idea of clearing out the storage area for next quarterly clean up.  Thanks for everyone's time in hashing out all these details!

[George Gelly]

Just 2 thoughts:

1) I think I was trying to suggest the "tone" for the communication to members/former-members... something positive, like "it's great to see we are up to 160+ members, sadly this now requires us to change the rules/enforcement of project storage".  I don't disagree with any of the direction suggested with changing rules and/or enforcement.

2) Perhaps we could corral some volunteers with larger vehicles (certainly on a limited basis) to be there for other members/former-members that might need to move things over the "60-day notice period.

[orion]

Link has been updated with revisions, please comment before Wednesday.

[Sebastian Wiers]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:12 PM, orion <bpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Link has been updated with revisions, please comment before Wednesday.

"A bin can be purchased from the space for $20, or you may buy one
yourself that meets the physical specifications and fits in the bin
racks. This is one time and good until the member is no longer in good
standing."

The second sentence here makes no sense. If you purchase a bin or
provide your own, I assume its still yours whether you remain a member
or not? Perhaps this is mean to apply to the storage space allocated
for that bin?

[Sebastian Wiers]

Figured I could note here that I sent an email to
"sto...@tcmaker.org" (cntl+c / cntl+v from
https://www.tcmaker.org/wiki/index.php?title=Shop_Departments#Member_Storage)
and got a response back saying "We're writing to let you know that the
group you tried to contact (storage) may not exist, or you may not
have permission to post messages to the group. A few more details on
why you weren't able to post....."

Since that email is noted in our wiki as being for CURRENT contact
regarding member storage, this seems a problem that maybe should be
addressed before implementing new rules...

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:12 PM, orion <bpa...@gmail.com> wrote:

[orion]

Fixed the email error.

[Jonathan Alt]

Wording on the revised rules is still pretty sharp. 

Maybe tonight at open house we can get a think group together to soften this up - and reduce it to 1 page.  (I have a hard time getting people to read 1 paragraph of rules for the wood shop - multiple page policies may get lost).

On Friday, September 30, 2016 at 10:31:55 PM UTC-5, orion wrote:

[Scott Hill]

I’ve done a re-revision of the revised rules, incorporating Jon’s edits. I put it into a separate document:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mw97WxqNqW9f7doly5zvF3TPpcXFalUXbEEwXqHch1c/edit?usp=sharing

[metis]

it probably makes more sense to ban "hazardous materials with a hazard rating of 1 or higher -- including explosive materials of any type  this includes but is not limited to live firearm ammunition, gun powder, powder actuated fasteners, binary explosives."

that covers pretty much anything that is a risk to spill on someone by accident.  It's not crazy that someone would have lye or strong acids in the space again, and storing that improperly isn't a brilliant idea.  

"ammunition" would include banning nerf darts and replica items unless we add a host of exceptions.

-m 

[Sebastian Wiers]

I came back to this after checking the size of Bankers boxes. Letter
size Banker Boxes are 24" x 10.5" x 15" - slightly smaller in volume,
and smaller in all but length. Would they be a viable option under
these rules? Is there any reason not to make them the recommended
default? They are much cheaper and much more widely available, and
you can write on them (maybe saving frustration if you can't find a
parking tag, certainly useful in other cases). Its what M5 Industries
/ Mythbusters use for storage, so I'd argue they have a good track
record in a similar application.

- Seb

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:31 PM, orion <bpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are the proposed rules for comment.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dJLjtZAJyQpwB9cNtb1i4i1K92gOmZcGbjbeMloNQoQ/edit
>

[George Gelly]

Last time the Member Storage Committee met (in December 2016) we discussed having a "cubby" that is a standard size, rather than a recommended tote.  I researched the options and came up with a "max tote size" that would translate to the cubby size (see: https://www.tcmaker.org/wiki/index.php?title=Max_Tote_Dimensions).  There will likely be a discussion at the board meeting tomorrow to make sure this is the direction.

So, in summary: I think a BankersBox would be OK if the board agrees with the "cubby" direction.

Also... perhaps you could come to the Board Meeting tomorrow to join the conversation :-)

George