OP's text is not a good example of clear concise English, so ELL users are advised not to imitate the excessively verbose phrasing.
It's badly-written for many reasons - one of which is that the specific words causing OP's confusion are syntactically ambiguous (though it would be stretching a point to claim that this leads to any meaningful semantic ambiguity).
The new printer was set to [do certain things] - which I assume is a clumsy way of saying it was set up = configured, but feasibly he actually meant set in position / placed [on the 9th floor].
The printer was set [up] with two objectives - the first of which is to simplify the access to the printer. But the second purpose is unclear - it's syntactically ambiguous whether purpose #2 is
(a) to simplify [the] access to [the] support needs [of blah blah]
(b) to simplify [the] support needs [of blah blah]
(c) to support [the] needs [of blah blah]
Note that in (a) and (b) above, support is an adjective - they're "needs" of the type associated with "[technical] support". But in (c) it's a verb - provide assistance to deal with those "needs". Also note that as indicated by the square brackets littering my examples, many of those definite articles are "optional" (and stylistically, most of them would be better discarded).
Much more direct and to the point would be, for example,...
It was set [up] for the growing number of employees
of on the recently opened floors of the third tower.
Even more direct, and discarding information that's unnecessary and/or irrelevant...
There is a new printer on the 9th floor of the 3rd tower.