VLAN, DHCP, Cisco Wireless LAN Controller Network

If I do use a layer 3 switch, do you know if it is possible to setup IP helper-address and Inter VLAN routing through the Web GUI or the Cisco Network Assistant?

Thanks for your help.

Honestly, I've never used the GUI configs except to set up Cisco wireless gear so I'm not sure if you can or not.  If you're going to be using Cisco gear, I would strongly advise learning to use the CLI. There's lots of examples out there and older Cisco routers can be had off Ebay pretty cheap for testing/learning with.

If there would no more, than100 boxes, bottleneck will not happened.
Switch on middle is totally extra( unless it will be PIX), and  it is better  use bigger Class B, for example.
This way, everything will be on same subnet, so will be no problem to access "central resources"  from "clients", regrdless of clients been separated by VLAN.
Every "logical group"- officce/servers and routers/contractors and so on better place in blocks by 255 IP in each block, for example.
In larger environments better use single subnet with size of your need, and separate them by VLAN's.
192.168.x.x is not recommended- it is for home/small company use.
172.16.0.0 on 255.255.0.0 will give you ~65000 addresses.
And you can use them by block
172.16.0.1-172.16.255 -servers/routers
172.16.2.1-172.16.255 -office users
172.16.3.1-172.16.255 -remote users
172.16.4.1-172.16.255 -other building users
172.16.5.1-172.16.255 -contractors

This way separation on usage can be easy achieve by ACL, on top of use VLAN's.
It is easy to manage enable firewalls, base on those "blocks", where is one logical group within certain range of IP .
Other advantage using blocks, that you can very easy to allow access of the non-trusted users, only to the particular range of IP - 172.16.10.1-172.16.255  shared equipment for contractors to test.
Cisco 2800 should be the edge router. Does have WebVpn allows max. flexibility for external users.

You can go throught design guide to pic up more ideas for particular needs.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/ns340/ns414/ns742/ns741/networking_solutions_products_genericcontent0900aecd80601e1d.html

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Branch/Overview.html

Thanks for all of the input.  I've updated my diagram according to the suggestions of TreyH and I will most likely be adjusting my IP scheme as recommended by dkarpekin.

This network will be installed in a medium sized hotel and I am trying to fulfill these requirements:
1) Guest VLAN for Wireless/Wired Internet access for hotel guests
2) Office VLAN for the front office network with possible Wireless Access
3) Security VLAN for IP cameras and storage
4) From what I've read on the forums, seems I will also need a Management VLAN
5) The Office and Security VLANs should be able to fully communicate between each other
6) The Guest VLAN should have no access to the other VLANs and only connect to the internet

I've attached the diagram of what I am currently thinking.  I will enable IP helper-address on the Layer 3 Switch to the DHCP server on each subnet interface so that every client can get IPs from separate scopes.  And I will use an ACL that allows routing between the Office/Security VLAN and only allows Guest VLAN traffic to access the internet.

Does all this seem right?  And is this a good solution?

Thank you again for all of the help.

I don't see nessaty of using Layer3 (sorry TeryH), you do usialy need layer3, when you have  a lot of routers on network, or it is really large network (campus type) to simply/orgonaized/of load CPU usage routs within structure.
In new diagram you have 4!!!! switches............should be only 1, maybe 48 port switch, but if there is need have extended distance-above 300 feet, then you use 2 switches conected over fiber backbone.
If you'll use Cisco2800 serias router, then you can add into 16 port switch module-use for "main" LAN, use FE0/0 port for WAN, and FE0/1 for additional subnet , diffrent than your "main" LAN.

P.S.
In your current configaration, you can have only 1switch (layer2 , instead of layer3) in "cental", and perefiriar switches replace with $30 8-16 "unmanaged" switches...................
Layer 3 is more expencive, than layer 2, and looks like total "overkill" in this scenario.

Please remember, not to "desy chain" switches, like you did layer3-vlan2-vlan3 link..................
It is not recomended go above 3 switches in chain (and you got close to it).
It is always adviced used star topology to minimaze switches in a link, connect them "backbone ports"

The only reason I was thinking to use a Layer 3 switch was due to possible bottlenecks mainly when connecting from VLAN 2 to VLAN 3.  VLAN 3 produces very large video files and from my understanding most decently priced routers only have 10/100 switch ports which could possible create a bottleneck.  Am I correct to assume this?  

Thus, I was thinking to use the Cisco Catalyst 3560-8PC (which is fairly inexpensive) as the Layer 3 switch which has 1 10/100/1000 port to Trunk to VLAN 2 and then possibly buy a Cisco 1800 series router.  

Thank you again for all of the input!  

P.S.
Placing everything on single subnet ( portions is still seperated by VLAN- so itis totaly save), will take away nessaty use "IP routing calculation", therefour reducing load on router (it is not going to be big anyway, but that was idea behind of using layer3).

Maybe not relitive but come across "HD ip camera" would be intersting to see how it will work/bandwith use of all 16, if you'll decide get one.....
http://www.sourcesecurity.com/new-products/listing/1/product-profile/cctv/image-capture/ip-cameras/indigovision-hd-fixed-ip-cameras.html

I'll keep that in mind when I redo the IP scheme.

As for the IP Cameras, current bandwith usage, for a similar camera you linked to, is between 6.4-11 Mbit/sec per camera using the MPEG4 codec which requires more then 100Gb of storage per day again per camera (without compression).  Newer cameras, like the one you linked to, have started using the H.264 codec which reduces bandwith/storage requirements by as much as 50%.  The new codec is changing the industry, but very few H.264 cameras are available today.  The vendor we are using, Axis Communications, who is the leader in the IP camera industry, has only 2 H.264 cameras so far which became available only 10 days ago.  So as of right now, I am reluctantly having to use the MPEG4 codec, and having to deal with the higher bandwith/storage server costs.