Case study:Stony Stratford Sluice bank repairs: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Case_study_status
{{Case study status
|Approval status=Draft
|Approval status=Approved
}}
}}
{{Location
{{Location
Line 16: Line 16:
|Multi-site=No
|Multi-site=No
|Project picture=Bundle Fixing.JPG
|Project picture=Bundle Fixing.JPG
|Project summary=The Environment Agency's Fisheries & Biodiversity and Operation team along with Milton Keynes Park's Trust repaired a section of eroded bank on the Great Ouse at Stony Stratford.<br>We used soft engineering in tho form of willow bundle revetments to reinforce and protect a section of bank that had become eroded as a result of livestock poaching and flow pressures from Stony Sluice.
|Project summary=The Environment Agency's Fisheries & Biodiversity and Operation team along with Milton Keynes Park's Trust repaired a section of eroded bank on the Great Ouse at Stony Stratford.<br>We used soft engineering in the form of willow bundle revetments to reinforce and protect a section of bank that had become eroded as a result of livestock poaching and flow pressures from Stony Sluice.
|Monitoring surveys and results=Fixed Photographs
|Monitoring surveys and results=Fixed point photography
}}
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery}}
Line 25: Line 25:
{{Case study image
{{Case study image
|File name=Stony After.JPG
|File name=Stony After.JPG
}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Oct 2014.jpg
}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Stony June.jpg
}}
}}
{{Image_gallery_end}}
{{Image_gallery_end}}
{{Toggle_button}}
{{Toggle_button}}
{{Toggle_content_start}}
{{Toggle_content_start}}
{{Case_study_subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=
|Subcatchment=Ouse (Buckingham to Cosgrove)
   
   
   
   
   
   
     
}}
}}
{{Site
{{Site
|Name=
|WFD water body code=GB105033037920
   
|WFD water body name=Ouse
   
|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=
|Funding sources=Environment Agency - Ops Delivery team carried out work,
   
|Works and supervision Lead organisation=Environment Agency
   
     
|Project started=
     
|Works started=
     
|Works completed=
     
|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=
|Specific mitigation=Land drainage, Flood risk management,
   
|Hydromorphological quality elements=Width & depth variation, Quantity & dynamics of flow,
   
     
|Biological quality elements=
     
|Physico-chemical quality elements=
     
|Specific mitigation=
     
|Other motivation=
     
}}
}}
{{Measures
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Soft erosion solutions,
   
   
     
|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 09:56, 2 November 2015

3.00
(one vote)


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


Location: 52° 3' 11.03" N, 0° 51' 23.26" 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
Country England
Main contact forename Rob
Main contact surname Clapham
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site http://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
Partner organisations Milton Keynes Park's Trust
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The Environment Agency's Fisheries & Biodiversity and Operation team along with Milton Keynes Park's Trust repaired a section of eroded bank on the Great Ouse at Stony Stratford.
We used soft engineering in the form of willow bundle revetments to reinforce and protect a section of bank that had become eroded as a result of livestock poaching and flow pressures from Stony Sluice.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


Fixed point photography

Lessons learnt

This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.


Image gallery


Stony Before.JPG
Stony After.JPG
Oct 2014.jpg
Stony June.jpg
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Anglian
River basin Upper and Bedford Ouse

Subcatchment

River name Ouse (Buckingham to Cosgrove)
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 100 - 200 m
Maximum altitude (m) 134134 m <br />0.134 km <br />13,400 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Arable and Horticulture
Waterbody ID GB105033037920



Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB105033037920
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Ouse
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)
Project started
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Environment Agency - Ops Delivery team carried out work

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 Environment Agency
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure Land drainage, Flood risk management
Hydromorphology Width & depth variation, Quantity & dynamics of flow
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Soft erosion solutions
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