Agmt06 Wagstaff & Associates - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 1 of 2 PLG-Maureen Riordan --- ---,----'----'-'----------------- --, ------'---------"'-'---'-----------'- ._----- -----,----.-..----- From: ATTY-Stan Yamamoto Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 20064:41 PM To: PLG-Maureen Riordan Cc: PLG-Tom Passanisi; ATTY-Julie Rosas Subject: AMENDMENT No.doc ok, here's a first cut at the Amendment NO.2 ----------,-_._--------_._----,-----,,-------------------------.-------.-----.-----.--.'--' AMENDMENT No.2 TO EXTEND AND AMEND AGREEEMENT FOR CONTRACT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER CONSULTANT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (Wagstaff and Associates) This Amendment No.2 is entered into and effective as of the day of ,2005, extending and amending the agreement dated September 20,2005 and rescinding Amendment No.1, dated February -' 2006 (the "Agreement") by and between the City of Redwood City, a charter city and municipal corporation of the State of Califonria ("City"), and Wagstaff and Associates, an urban and environmental planners consulting firm (Consultant") (collectively the "Parties") for the proposed Stanford Medical Outpatient Center Project. RECITALS WHEREAS, on or about September 20, 2005, the Parties entered into an agreement whereby Consultant would prepare a mitigated negative declaration for the Stanford Medical Outpatient Center Project, hereinafter the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the cost of said mitigated negative declartion for the Project was establsihed as Fifty Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Thiry-nine Dollars ($59,439.00); and WHEREAS, on or about February 6, 2006, the parties entered into Amendment No.1 of the September 20, 2005 agreement whereby Consultant would expand their work to undertake a Supplemental EIR instead of a mitigated negative declaration for the Stanford Medical Outpatient Center Project; and WHEREAS, the cost of said Supplemental EIR for the Project was established as the not to exceed amount of Seventy One Thousand Six Hundred and Ninety-nine Dollars ($71,699.00); and WHEREAS, at the time that Amendment No.1 was entered into, the total not to exceed cost of all work to be performed by Consultant pursuant to the September 20, 2005 and Amendment No.1 agreement was erroneously identified as Seventy One Thousand Six Hundred and Ninety- nine Dollars ($71,699.00); and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to rescind Amendment No.1 in order that the true cost of all work to be performed by Consultant shall reflect the correct sum of One Hundred Thirty-one Thousand One Hundred and Thirty-eight Dollars ($131,138.00). 3/29/2006