Case study:Telford Catchment Restoration Project: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
|Contact organisation=Shropshire Wildlife Trust
|Contact organisation=Shropshire Wildlife Trust
|Contact organisation url=www.shropshirewildlifetrust.org.uk
|Contact organisation url=www.shropshirewildlifetrust.org.uk
|Partner organisations=Environment Agency, Telford and Wrekin Council, Severn Trent Water, Stirchley and Brookside PC, Ricoh RPL, BESST, University of Wolverhampton, Severn Gorge Countryside Trust, Wrekin Forest Volunteers
|Multi-site=No
|Multi-site=No
|Project summary=The Telford Catchment Restoration project targeted two WFD failing urban catchments in the West Midlands townships of Telford.  
|Project summary=The Telford Catchment Restoration project targeted two WFD failing urban catchments in the West Midlands townships of Telford.  
Line 30: Line 31:


Aquatic and chemical water quality monitoring results are awaiting post project analysis.
Aquatic and chemical water quality monitoring results are awaiting post project analysis.
|Lessons learn=The main flagship site at Madebrook involved the design, planning and construction of a new de-culverted watercourse in an urban setting. The technical challenges were many and steadily overcome by the project team. Costs were high and this made budgeting a challenge, good collaboration and flexible design allowed the project to proceed to a successful conclusion. Involving the local community at an early stage and keeping them involved is key in a project which will at times disrupt the local area. Good liaison has helped maintain good will and has helped build confidence as we move on to new projects in the local area.  
|Lessons learn=The main flagship site at Madebrook involved the design, planning and construction of a new de-culverted watercourse in an urban setting. The technical challenges were many and steadily overcome by the project team. Costs were high and this made budgeting a challenge, good collaboration and flexible design allowed the project to proceed to a successful conclusion. Involving the local community at an early stage and keeping them involved is key in a project which will at times disrupt the local area. Good liaison has helped maintain good will and has helped build confidence as we move on to new projects in the local area.
}}
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery}}

Revision as of 08:48, 6 March 2015

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

0.00
(0 votes)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 52° 38' 44.74" N, 2° 25' 59.26" W
Loading map...
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.


Project overview

Edit project overview
Status Complete
Project web site
Themes Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Urban
Country England
Main contact forename Pete
Main contact surname Lambert
Main contact user ID User:PeteLambert
Contact organisation Shropshire Wildlife Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.shropshirewildlifetrust.org.uk
Partner organisations Environment Agency, Telford and Wrekin Council, Severn Trent Water, Stirchley and Brookside PC, Ricoh RPL, BESST, University of Wolverhampton, Severn Gorge Countryside Trust, Wrekin Forest Volunteers
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The Telford Catchment Restoration project targeted two WFD failing urban catchments in the West Midlands townships of Telford.

Madebrook - A 350m de-culverting project restored a historical stream way along the Madebrook and significantly enhanced a busy local greenspace. A series of three rock cascades improved ecological connectivity and raised dissolved oxygen levels. Lydebrook - in this catchment a range of soft engineering and habitat techniques were used to address poor water quality and post-industrial modification. Hedge laying has been used to address erosion, pre-planted coir rolls utilised to create new wetland edge to provide habitat and water cleansing capacity to the series of balancing pools and channels.

The wider project promoted retro-fit SuDs to the business community, supporting the publication of a feasiblity study into retro-fit SuDs on a local industrial estate, project managed the design of a retro-fit SuDs for a large factory site and worked collaboratively with the regional utility company.

Training and support was provided to local volunteers who formed a dedicated group to undertake chemical and aquatic invertbrate monitoring in direct relation to the practical works.

A specially designed schools programme, 'River Rangers' was piloted to primary schools within the target catchments. The schools scheme including exploring their local water course, conducting a school water audit and finally designing and with our support constructing their own rain garden or other SuDs feature.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


Monitoring of public responses to the project has shown good support and understanding of the reasons for the works. Volunteer engagement has been of a high quality and helped immensely in realising the broader aims of the project.

Fixed point photography has demonstrated the quick recovery rate of new earthworks and features.

Aquatic and chemical water quality monitoring results are awaiting post project analysis.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


The main flagship site at Madebrook involved the design, planning and construction of a new de-culverted watercourse in an urban setting. The technical challenges were many and steadily overcome by the project team. Costs were high and this made budgeting a challenge, good collaboration and flexible design allowed the project to proceed to a successful conclusion. Involving the local community at an early stage and keeping them involved is key in a project which will at times disrupt the local area. Good liaison has helped maintain good will and has helped build confidence as we move on to new projects in the local area.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
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
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
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



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information