Case study:London Olympics Parklands: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Case study status | {{Case study status | ||
|Approval status= | |Approval status=Approved | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Location | {{Location | ||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
|Main contact surname=Vaughan | |Main contact surname=Vaughan | ||
|Contact organisation=Atkins, Olympic Development Authority | |Contact organisation=Atkins, Olympic Development Authority | ||
|Contact organisation url= | |Contact organisation url=www.landscapeinstitute.org/knowledge/olympics.php | ||
|Partner organisations=Atkins, Olympic Development Authority, Environment Agency, Natural England | |Partner organisations=Atkins, Olympic Development Authority, Environment Agency, Natural England | ||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
Native species planted, including oak, ash, willow, birch, hazel, holly, blackthorn and hawthorn – a home for wildlife in the middle of the city. | Native species planted, including oak, ash, willow, birch, hazel, holly, blackthorn and hawthorn – a home for wildlife in the middle of the city. | ||
30,000 tonnes of silt removed from waterways. | *30,000 tonnes of silt removed from waterways. | ||
280 hectares of brownfield land cleaned. | *280 hectares of brownfield land cleaned. | ||
750 bat roost and bird boxes put on site. | *750 bat roost and bird boxes put on site. | ||
45 hectares of wildlife habitat created. | *45 hectares of wildlife habitat created. | ||
20 million gallons of contaminated groundwater treated. | *20 million gallons of contaminated groundwater treated. | ||
4000 homes in West Ham and Canning Town have reduced flood risk. | *4000 homes in West Ham and Canning Town have reduced flood risk. | ||
99.5 per cent of construction waste re-used, recycled or recovered. | *99.5 per cent of construction waste re-used, recycled or recovered. | ||
98 per cent of material from demolition work re-used, recycled or recovered. | *98 per cent of material from demolition work re-used, recycled or recovered. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | |||
{{Image gallery end}} | |||
{{Toggle button}} | |||
{{Toggle content start}} | |||
{{Case study subcatchment | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
|Subcatchment=Lee | |Subcatchment=River Lee Navigation, tidal section | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Site | {{Site | ||
|Name=Olympic Parkland | |Name=Olympic Parkland | ||
|WFD water body name=River | |WFD water body code=GB70610068 | ||
|WFD water body name=River Lee Navigation, tidal section | |||
|Heavily modified water body=No | |Heavily modified water body=No | ||
|Protected species present=No | |Protected species present=No | ||
|Invasive species present=Yes | |Invasive species present=Yes | ||
|Species=Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), | |Species=Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), | ||
|River corridor land use=Urban, | |River corridor land use=Urban, | ||
}} | }} | ||
Line 66: | Line 71: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Measures | {{Measures | ||
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Habitat diversification, | |Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Habitat diversification, | ||
|Floodplain / River corridor=Reedbed creation, Creation of | |Floodplain / River corridor=Reedbed creation, Creation of wetland, Creation of wet woodland | ||
|Social measures=Awareness | |Social measures=Awareness raising, | ||
|Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement= | |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Community engagement, | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | ||
Line 81: | Line 86: | ||
{{Monitoring documents}} | {{Monitoring documents}} | ||
{{Monitoring documents end}} | {{Monitoring documents end}} | ||
{{Additional Documents}} | {{Additional Documents}} | ||
{{Case study documents | {{Case study documents | ||
Line 104: | Line 107: | ||
{{Additional links and references footer}} | {{Additional links and references footer}} | ||
{{Supplementary Information}} | {{Supplementary Information}} | ||
{{Toggle content end}} |
Latest revision as of 11:48, 25 November 2020
Location: 51° 32' 49.21" N, 0° 1' 2.57" W
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Spatial planning |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Mike |
Main contact surname | Vaughan |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Atkins, Olympic Development Authority |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.landscapeinstitute.org/knowledge/olympics.php |
Partner organisations | Atkins, Olympic Development Authority, Environment Agency, Natural England |
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 Olympic Park will bring lasting benefits to east London. After the Games, it will be transformed to include a huge urban park. The new park will link the tidal Thames Estuary to the south and the Hertfordshire countryside to the north.
Some of the major benefits to the environment include:
- 8kms of river restored
- 4,000 homes protected from flood
- 2 million tonnes soil decontaminated
- The largest urban park created in Europe for over 100 years
Native species planted, including oak, ash, willow, birch, hazel, holly, blackthorn and hawthorn – a home for wildlife in the middle of the city.
- 30,000 tonnes of silt removed from waterways.
- 280 hectares of brownfield land cleaned.
- 750 bat roost and bird boxes put on site.
- 45 hectares of wildlife habitat created.
- 20 million gallons of contaminated groundwater treated.
- 4000 homes in West Ham and Canning Town have reduced flood risk.
- 99.5 per cent of construction waste re-used, recycled or recovered.
- 98 per cent of material from demolition work re-used, recycled or recovered.
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 subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
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
|