Laserfiche WebLink
<br />A 'IT ACHMENT 1 <br /> <br />6.1C <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />L S ^ I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, <br />ZZ 1 5 FIFTH STREET <br />BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94710 <br /> <br />510,540.7331 TBL <br />510.540.7344 FAX <br /> <br />CAR.4SBAD IRVINE <br />COLMA PALM SPRINGS <br />FORT COLLINS POINT RICHMOND <br /> <br />lUVBRSIDE <br />ROCKLIN <br />SAN LUIS OBISPO <br /> <br />January 31, 2008 <br /> <br />Tom Passanisi, AICP, Principal Planner <br />Planning Division <br />City of Redwood City <br />1017 Middlefield Road <br />Redwood City, CA 94063 <br /> <br />Subject: <br /> <br />Budget Augment for The Preserve at Redwood Shores Project EIR <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Passanisi: <br /> <br />LSA is requesting approval of a budget augment of $3,800.00 to the existing approved budget of <br />$177,230.00 for a total budget of$181,030 for preparation of The Preserve at Redwood Shores Project <br />EIR. <br /> <br />The budget as approved included a contingency of $11,065 which required your prior approval to use. <br />You approved an expenditure of$1,360,00 from the contingency on June 7,2007 to have LSA assist <br />the City with tribal consultation which is required by State Law for a General Plan Amendment. The <br />scope of work included funding for a Northwest Infonnation Center records search and staff time to <br />send the survey results to Ms, Sayers, the tribal representative that requested consultation in response <br />to our initial notification. <br /> <br />On September 14, 2007, you approved an expenditure of $9,200 for the visual simulations. With this <br />approval, $10,560 of the $11,065 contingency had been authorized to be used. After providing <br />comments on the draft versions of the simulations we provided final versions of the simulations in <br />October. 2007. Subsequently, you asked that the simulations be provided without any landscaping, <br />and also with smaller, younger vegetation. On November 26, 2007, you approved additional visual <br />simulation work to provide these views at a cost of $2,450 and confmned that if there were insufficient <br />funds in the budget to cover this amount, additional funds would be requested from the applicant. <br /> <br />Other out of scope services provided during the preparation of The Preserve EIR included: <br /> <br />· Providing more copies of the Administrative Draft EIR (18 instead of 5), the Draft EIR (80 instead <br />of 50), and the RTC (42 instead of 30) than provided for in the approved scope of work. <br /> <br />· Reviewing three versions of the transportation impact analysis, requiring revising the <br />transportation section tWice. <br /> <br />· Receiving the City's comments to the administrative drafts and screen check drafts from several <br />commenters, instead of a single consolidated and reconciled set of comments as specified in the <br />approved scope of work, <br /> <br />Pl.ANNING <br /> <br />ENVIRONMEN'fAL <br /> <br />D.E5[GN <br />