FY 2001 Innovative proposal 22035
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 22035 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Renaturalize Functional Floodplain Habitat within the Portland Reach of the Lower Willamette River |
| Proposal ID | 22035 |
| Organization | ZRZ Realty Company (a Zidell Company) (Zidell) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Paul A. Fishman |
| Mailing address | Fishman Environmental Services 434 NW Sixth Ave. Ste. 304 Portland, OR 97209 |
| Phone / email | 5032240333 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | Steven L. Shain, Vice President, Zidell Companies |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Innovative |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Columbia / Willamette |
| Short description | Restore river/floodplain habitat diversity in an urbanized, channelized reach of the Willamette R. by adding river alluvium, plant materials and large wood in an existing shallow depositional area. This is one component of a larger project. |
| Target species | salmonid juveniles, riparian wildlife, aquatic invertebrates |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 45.5 | -122.67 | Lower Willamette River |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: Based on hourly billing rates | $246,500 |
| Fringe | included in billing rates for personnel, above | $0 |
| Supplies | includes construction contractor, materials, surveying, lab costs, expendibles | $1,174,000 |
| Travel | n/a | $0 |
| Indirect | n/a | $0 |
| Capital | n/a | $0 |
| PIT tags | n/a | $0 |
| Subcontractor | # of tags: see personnel, above | $0 |
| $1,420,500 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $1,420,500 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $1,420,500 |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zidell Company | Project management, riverbank renaturalization costs, conceptual design (1999-2000) | $812,000 | cash |
| City of Portland | Information transfer, City web page, stakeholder coordination, publication costs, ODFW sampling | $69,500 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Although the proposal may be worthwhile, the panel was not convinced that implementing urban habitat restoration on a large scale fits the innovative criteria. The habitat restoration technique is not particularly innovative (other than in its magnitude). Even if cost sharing is subtracted from the project it apparently exceeds the funding limit specified in the solicitation package. It may be more appropriate to submit this with the subbasin proposals for this Province.Comment:
Budget exceeds $400,000.Comment:
Budget exceeds $400,000.