Case study:West Lexham Rehabilitation Project: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Case study status | {{Case study status | ||
|Approval status= | |Approval status=Approved | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Location | {{Location |
Revision as of 16:09, 5 September 2013
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Nigel T.H. |
Main contact surname | Holmes |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | |
Contact organisation web site | |
Partner organisations | River Restoration Centre, Environment Agency, Norfolk County Council, Natural England |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
Project summary
A half day work to remove the impounding influence of a weir, and in the channel upstream four pools and runs were dug. A second weir, between two bridges c35m downstream of the one shown in the images, was also removed. This structure had minimal impact on habitat, but was an impediment to easy migration of fish etc. wishing pass upstream.
The structure within the meadow that was impounding the Nar upstream had some archaeological interest. For this reason there was a ‘watching brief’ from Norfolk County Council to ensure there was no damage done to any known existing interest features, and to record anything else of interest should this be revealed during the removal of the impounding structure. To minimise damage to the historical elements of the bridge, the concrete ‘boards’ were removed with great care, leaving the central pillar and upper lintel in place, yet drawing the bed down to the required level.
The effect of centuries of impoundment has been to create a sluggish/non-existent flow in the river upstream with the resultant deposition of thick layers of mud. Pools were created by widening the channel locally. To help keep the pools clear in the future, the channel was narrowed upstream. Due to the extreme depth of soft mud, narrowing was achieved by pushing in one side of the existing river edge with the back of the bucket, and the void created behind this was filled with the arisings from creating the pools. Four pools and upstream ‘runs’ were created, with the run formed upstream of the second pool from the top having a small amount of gravel spread on the bed – this was won from the bed of the river in the pool downstream.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Catchment and subcatchment
Edit the catchment and subcatchment details
(affects all case studies in this subcatchment)
Catchment
River basin district | Anglian |
---|---|
River basin | North West Norfolk |
Subcatchment
River name | Nar |
---|---|
Area category | |
Area (km2) | |
Maximum altitude category | |
Maximum altitude (m) | |
Dominant geology | |
Ecoregion | |
Dominant land cover | |
Waterbody ID |
Site
Name | West Lexham |
---|---|
WFD water body codes | |
WFD (national) typology | |
WFD water body name | |
Pre-project morphology | Single channel, impounded, straightened |
Reference morphology | Single channel, Pool-riffle, Sinuous |
Desired post project morphology | |
Heavily modified water body | No |
National/international site designation | |
Local/regional site designations | |
Protected species present | No |
Invasive species present | No |
Species of interest | |
Dominant hydrology | |
Dominant substrate | |
River corridor land use | |
Average bankfull channel width category | |
Average bankfull channel width (m) | |
Average bankfull channel depth category | |
Average bankfull channel depth (m) | |
Mean discharge category | |
Mean annual discharge (m3/s) | |
Average channel gradient category | |
Average channel gradient | |
Average unit stream power (W/m2) |
Project background
Reach length directly affected (m) | |
---|---|
Project started | 2011/02/28 |
Works started | |
Works completed | |
Project completed | 2011/03/04 |
Total cost category | |
Total cost (k€) | |
Benefit to cost ratio | |
Funding sources |
Cost for project phases
Phase | cost category | cost exact (k€) | Lead organisation | Contact forename | Contact surname |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Investigation and design | |||||
Stakeholder engagement and communication | |||||
Works and works supervision | |||||
Post-project management and maintenance | |||||
Monitoring |
Reasons for river restoration
Mitigation of a pressure | |
---|---|
Hydromorphology | |
Biology | |
Physico-chemical | |
Other reasons for the project |
Measures
Structural measures
| |
---|---|
Bank/bed modifications | |
Floodplain / River corridor | |
Planform / Channel pattern | |
Other | |
Non-structural measures
| |
Management interventions | |
Social measures (incl. engagement) | |
Other |
Monitoring
Hydromorphological quality elements
Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative |
Biological quality elements
Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative |
Physico-chemical quality elements
Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative |
Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic
Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative |
Monitoring documents
Image gallery
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Link | Description |
---|
Supplementary Information
Edit Supplementary Information