Case study:Parish Wood Park: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(8 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 14: Line 14:
{{Project overview
{{Project overview
|Status=Planned
|Status=Planned
|Themes=Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits
|Country=England
|Country=England
|Main contact forename=Mark
|Main contact forename=Mark
|Main contact surname=Taylor
|Main contact surname=Taylor
|Contact organisation=London Borough of Bexley
|Contact organisation=London Borough of Bexley
|Partner organisations=Local school, Bexley Council, Natural England, Environment Agency
|Multi-site=No
|Multi-site=No
|Project summary=Facilitate the passage of elvers around Osterley Weir, Hanwell Environment Trust asset. A desire to improve the River Brent in all aspects, but particularly for fish health and connectivity.
|Project summary=Facilitate the passage of elvers around Osterley Weir, Hanwell Environment Trust asset. A desire to improve the River Brent in all aspects, but particularly for fish health and connectivity.
|Lessons learn=July 2011: Wetland working very well as partly groundwater fed. The presence of contaminated soil has limited the aspirations of modifying the river bank.
}}
}}
{{Image_gallery}}
{{Image_gallery}}
Line 25: Line 28:
{{Toggle_button}}
{{Toggle_button}}
{{Toggle_content_start}}
{{Toggle_content_start}}
{{Case_study_subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=
|Subcatchment=Shuttle
   
   
   
   
   
   
     
}}
}}
{{Site
{{Site
|Name=
|WFD water body code=GB106040024210
   
|WFD water body name=Shuttle
   
|Heavily modified water body=No
     
|Protected species present=No
|WFD water body code=
|Invasive species present=No
     
|WFD (national) typology=
     
|WFD water body name=
     
|Pre-project morphology=
     
|Reference morphology=
     
|Heavily modified water body=
     
|Local site designation=
     
|Site designation=
     
|Protected species present=
     
|Invasive species present=
     
|Species=
     
|Dominant hydrology=
     
|Dominant substrate=
     
|River corridor land use=
     
|Average bankfull channel width category=
     
|Avrg bankfull channel width=
     
|Average bankfull channel depth category=
     
|Avrg1 bankfull channel depth=
     
|Mean discharge category=
     
|Mn discharge=
     
|Average channel gradient category=
     
|Avrg channel gradient=
     
}}
}}
{{Project_background
{{Project background
|Reach length directly affected=
|Reach length directly affected=110 m
   
|Works completed=2011/01/01
   
|Funding sources=Mayor’s Priority Parks - Winner 
      110 m
|Project started=
     
|Works started=
     
|Works completed=
      2011/01/01
|Project completed=
     
|Total cost category=
     
|Total1 cost=
     
|Funding sources=
     
|Investigation and design cost category=
     
|Invst and design cost=
     
|Investigation and design Lead organisation=
     
|Investigation and design Other contact forename=
     
|Investigation and design Other contact surname=
     
|Stakeholder1 engagement cost category=
     
|stk engagement cost=
     
|Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=
     
|Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=
     
|Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=
     
|Works1 and supervision cost category=
     
|Wrk and supervision cost=
     
|Works and supervision Lead organisation=
     
|Works and supervision Other contact forename=
     
|Works and supervision Other contact surname=
     
|Post-project1 management and maintenance cost category=
     
|Post-project2 management and maintenance cost=
     
|Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=
     
|Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=
     
|Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=
     
|Monitoring1 cost category=
     
|Monitoring2 cost=
     
|Monitoring Lead organisation=
     
|Monitoring Other contact forename=
     
|Monitoring Other contact surname=
     
|Supplementary funding information=
     
}}
}}
{{Motivations
{{Motivations
|Hydromorphological quality elements=
|Other motivation=Community demand
   
   
     
|Biological quality elements=
     
|Physico-chemical quality elements=
     
|Specific mitigation=
     
|Other motivation=
     
}}
}}
{{Measures
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=
|Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of wetland
   
|Management interventions=Woodland management
   
|Social measures=Improved public access
     
|Floodplain / River corridor=
     
|Planform / Channel pattern=
     
|Other technical measure=
     
|Management interventions=
     
|Social measures=
     
|Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=
     
}}
}}
{{Hydromorphological_quality_elements_header}}
{{Hydromorphological_quality_elements_header}}

Latest revision as of 11:01, 27 October 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: 51° 26' 47.56" N, 0° 5' 19.62" E
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 Planned
Project web site
Themes Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits
Country England
Main contact forename Mark
Main contact surname Taylor
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation London Borough of Bexley
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations Local school, Bexley Council, Natural England, Environment Agency
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.


Facilitate the passage of elvers around Osterley Weir, Hanwell Environment Trust asset. A desire to improve the River Brent in all aspects, but particularly for fish health and connectivity.

Monitoring surveys and results

This case study hasn’t got any Monitoring survey and results, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


July 2011: Wetland working very well as partly groundwater fed. The presence of contaminated soil has limited the aspirations of modifying the river bank.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Thames
River basin Darent

Subcatchment

River name Shuttle
Area category 10 - 100 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 100 - 200 m
Maximum altitude (m) 106106 m <br />0.106 km <br />10,600 cm <br />
Dominant geology Siliceous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Suburban
Waterbody ID GB106040024210



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Hollyoak Wood and Willersley Park, River Shuttle Enhancement Works - Love Lane, River Shuttle Enhancement Works - Malborough Park


Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB106040024210
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Shuttle
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
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) 110 m0.11 km <br />11,000 cm <br />
Project started
Works started
Works completed 2011/01/01
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Mayor’s Priority Parks - Winner

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 Community demand


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor Creation of wetland
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions Woodland management
Social measures (incl. engagement) Improved public access
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