Laserfiche WebLink
6.1 C <br /> Page 11 <br /> Mr. Tom Passanisi, AICP <br /> December 17, 2010 <br /> Page 2 <br /> Budget remaining from 2009 contract (excfuding oontingency) 26.26 <br /> Additionaf incurred costs (items 1 through 7 below) 96,133.10 <br /> Estimated remaining costs (item 8 below) 8,279.48 <br /> Total additional cost (items 1 through 8 below minus 26.26) $104,386.02 <br /> Contingency remaining from 2009 contract (release requested) $17,883.00 <br /> Tatal contract amendment request �86,503.02 <br /> Itemized Total Additional Costs Estimated Cost <br /> 1. Collabo�atfon and Coordination of New Shadow $16,119.64 <br /> Diagrams, Related DPP Policy, and CEQA Signiflcance <br /> Thresholds. The overall shadow impact evaluation work scope <br /> proved to be more extensive than anticipated at the time of original <br /> contract approval. At the time of contract approval, no shadow <br /> modeling of the DPP area had been prepared. Wagstaff/MIG <br /> collaborated and coordinated extensively with City staff and the <br /> City's consulting attorney in identifying potential shadow issues, <br /> defining feasib�e shadow policy, and formulating defensible <br /> significance criteria for potential shadow impacts. Subsequently, in <br /> conjunction with the extensive shadow modeling exhibits prepared <br /> for the City, WagstafflMlG independently evatuated and integrated <br /> the information resulting from this process into the EIR. <br /> 2. Collaboration and Coordinatfon of New Historic Resource $18,259.86 <br /> Survey Information with Cfty Staff for lncorporation into EIR <br /> Analysis. Similar to the shadow issue (item #1 above), City staff <br /> and Wagstaff/MIG collaborated and coordinated more intensely <br /> than anticipated on the historic resource topic. Wagstaff/MIG <br /> independently evaluated and integrated the extensive new historic <br /> resource information into the EIR pursuant to the particular <br /> requiremenfs and analysis framework of the Califomia <br /> Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute and Guidelines. The <br /> overall process of staff dialogue regarding the evolving DPP <br /> historic preservation provisions (e.g., the Historic Resources <br /> Preservation Strategy) proved to be substantially more extensive <br /> than anticipated at the time of original contract approval. <br /> 3. Periodic City Upciates to DPP Precise Plan Document $19,333.97 <br /> (Including Boundary) During EIR Process. At the time of <br /> contract approval, the new DPP document had not been finalized <br /> for CEQA review and analysis, and one version of the new DPP <br /> document was anticipated for CEQA evaluation. The May 2007 <br /> version of the new DPP was available at the time, which was a <br /> revision of the September 2006 DPP evaluated for the previous <br /> (2006) Draft EIR. After contract approval and during the EIR <br /> preparation process, the following additional DPP documents were <br /> completed and made available to Wagstaff/MIG for anafysis: (a) <br /> February 12, 2010 Draft Book If (new Books I anQ fl! not yet <br /> available); (b) Niarch 22, 2010 City Counci( Update Draft Book I1 <br /> T.�1 fOBI11fp-f2-11-101e(ter (10611).doc <br />