US Customs and Border Protection Ajo Housing Development ... - GSA
US Customs and Border Protection Ajo Housing Development ... - GSA
US Customs and Border Protection Ajo Housing Development ... - GSA
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
INTERNATIONAL SONORAN DESERT ALLIANCE. AlIANZA INTERNACIONAl DEL DESIERTO SONORENSE<br />
401 W Esperanza Ave. <strong>Ajo</strong>. AZ 85321 • 520·387·6823 • www.isdanet.or<br />
Osmahn Kadri<br />
U.S. General Services Administration<br />
P011folio Management Division<br />
450 Golden Gate Ave., 3rd Floor East<br />
San Francisco, CA 94102<br />
MI'. Kadri:<br />
At the last public meeting held in <strong>Ajo</strong> concerning the <strong>GSA</strong> cap <strong>Ajo</strong> <strong>Housing</strong> <strong>Development</strong> Project, I<br />
requested copies oftwo documents that were referenced in the Draft Environmental Assessment dated<br />
November 2011. Those documents are:<br />
I) CDP <strong>Housing</strong> Program Feasibility Study, <strong>Ajo</strong>, Arizona - Complete Report (GalTison<br />
Architects 2009)<br />
2) U.S. <strong>Customs</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Border</strong> <strong>Protection</strong> Mm*et SW1 1 ey of<strong>Housing</strong>/or tlte Area of<strong>Ajo</strong> <strong>and</strong> Why.<br />
Arizona, May 2010 (CBP 2010)<br />
As I stated in my comments at the meeting, vh1uaUy all ofthe comments to the <strong>GSA</strong>'s housing<br />
proposal- from the local level to the federal- asked why the construction ofsingle-family, single-site<br />
infill homes was not considered. In each case, the draft environmental assessment referenced the two<br />
publications above <strong>and</strong> stated that due to findings contained within these documents a single-site infill<br />
strategy had been deemed infeasible.<br />
To attach such weight <strong>and</strong> imp0l1ance to these findings <strong>and</strong> not make them available with the<br />
environmental assessment I believe goes against the best interest ofthis project <strong>and</strong> ofwhat you are<br />
trying to achieve. The cOlmnunity has information, knowledge <strong>and</strong> experience that in most cases<br />
benefits government projects. As a broad principle, it should be embraced, not ignored, stonewalled or<br />
worked around.<br />
I am no expert in government law, but I am pretty sure that referring all community complaints to<br />
conclusions held in documents that are never released until after the decision is made or at least until<br />
after the public comment period ends, pretty much makes a mockery ofthe statutes that require public<br />
pal1icipation in the first place. I see this as a serious breach ofproject administration protocol.<br />
Taking these points into consideration, I ask that the two documents above be made available to the<br />
public immediately, <strong>and</strong> that the public comment period be extended for three months so that the<br />
information presented within the draft environmental assessment can be considered in the proper<br />
context.<br />
d~<br />
Nick Francis<br />
Economic <strong>Development</strong> Specialist
Change language