Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />4 West Fourth Avenue, Suite 303 <br />San Mateo, CA 94402 <br />TEL (650) 373-1200 <br />FAX (650) 373-1211 <br /> <br />. NVIRONIt.,nu. CONSULTl". <br /> <br />An RMT Business <br /> <br />www.rmtinc.com <br /> <br />January 21,2008 <br /> <br />Charles Jany <br />City of Redwood City <br />1017 Middlefield Road <br />Redwood City, California 94063 <br /> <br />RE: Proposal to Augment the Existing Scope and Budget to Prepare the Initial Study/ Mitigated <br />Negative Declaration for the Cedar Street Supportive Housing Project <br /> <br />Dear Charles, <br /> <br />Since beginning work on drafting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for this <br />project, it has quickly become clear to me that the original scope and budget that I submitted to <br />you for this project would be insufficient to provide the services I described. When I first spoke <br />with you regarding this project, you indicated that an Environmental Assessment (EA) had been <br />prepared for this project, and that the IS you wanted us to prepare would basically be a copy of <br />the EA with some additional information added. The scope and budget I submitted for the <br />preparation of the IS assumed that there would be a more extensive EA that we could lift <br />information from, and that there would be a minimum of document sections that we would have to <br />create from scratch. <br /> <br />When I reviewed the EA, however, I discovered that the NEPA document does not contain the <br />sort of information that I was expecting. The information in the EA is insufficient for our needs, and <br />there re is little in the EA that my staff and I can lift into our CEQA document. For example, the EA <br />is almost entirely lacking a project description, a discussion of the project setting, and an <br />alternatives analysis. The discussion of potential environmental impacts is also scant, with little to <br />aid MHAIRMT staff in defining the impacts section for the IS. While I understand that this EA is <br />sufficient for the needs of HUD and has been certified by that agency, the EA does not contain the <br />sort of information and discussion that I was anticipating. <br /> <br />In addition, it is taking greater effort than had been originally anticipated to track down all the <br />background documents required for the CEQA analysis. For example, we are in the process of <br />tracking down the pieces of the EA from Bob Shaw to replace the portions of the EA that were <br />missing in the City's files, and we are also trying to obtain up-to-date soil information and <br />contamination and construction soil reports from Melissa Platte at MHA. <br /> <br />In order to adequately complete the IS/MND, we are respectfully requesting an augment to the <br />portion of the budget devoted to the preparation of the Administrative Draft IS/MND. The augment <br />would include 24 additional hours for Chrissy Spanoghe, and 12 additional hours for Jeffrey <br />Smith. These added hours also include a third meeting before either the Planning Commission or <br />City Council. These additional hours would represent a budget increase of approximately <br />$3,540.00. <br /> <br />Thank you for your consideration. We are happy to work with you in any manner to complete the <br />document. <br /> <br />MHA is a business unit of RMT, Inc., an environmental, energy and engineering consulting firm, with corporate headquarters at 744 Heartland <br />Trail, Madison, WI 53717, www.rmtinc.com <br />