Case study:Hightown Sand Dune Restoration: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Case study status | {{Case study status | ||
|Approval status= | |Approval status=Approved | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Location | {{Location | ||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site}} | ||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background | ||
{{Motivations}} | |Total1 cost=£1.4m | ||
{{Measures}} | |Funding sources=Housing developer | ||
}} | |||
{{Motivations | |||
|Specific mitigation=Flood and coastal erosion protection, | |||
}} | |||
{{Measures | |||
|Other technical measure=Sand dune restoration | |||
}} | |||
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | ||
{{End table}} | {{End table}} |
Latest revision as of 15:51, 8 November 2018
Location: 53° 31' 37.65" N, 3° 4' 13.59" W
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.
Project overview
Status | In progress |
---|---|
Project web site | http://www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/59_hightown.pdf |
Themes | Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Monitoring, Social benefits |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Graham |
Main contact surname | Lymbery |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.sefton.gov.uk/ |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
Edit project overview to modify the project summary.
The sand dunes at Hightown north of Liverpool (Photo 1 and Map 1) were eroding at a rate of 0.5–1m per year. The structure protecting Blundellsands Sailing Club had less than a 10 year life span remaining, and 125 properties and the sailing club were at risk from coastal erosion. Using Section 106 money, a scheme was developed to buy more time by reinstating the dunes to the position they were in 30 years ago.
Prior to the project this section of coast was losing, on average, 1,000m3 of sand a year. Post project it is losing the same amount, so by moving 28,000m3 of sand 28 years of time has been bought back.
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
This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchment
Site
Project background
Cost for project phases
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
MonitoringHydromorphological quality elements
Biological quality elements
Physico-chemical quality elements
Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic
Monitoring documents
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Supplementary InformationEdit Supplementary Information
|