Case study:Short Heath Brook Project: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{Case study status |Approval status=Draft }} {{Location |Location=52.528924435853, -1.8525982666016 }} {{Project overview |Project title=Short Heath Brook Project |Status=In ...")
 
No edit summary
 
(24 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Case study status
{{Case study status
|Approval status=Draft
|Approval status=Approved
}}
}}
{{Location
{{Location
Line 6: Line 6:
}}
}}
{{Project overview
{{Project overview
|Project title=Short Heath Brook Project
|Status=In progress
|Status=In progress
|Themes=Social benefits, Water quality
|Themes=Social benefits, Water quality, Urban
|Country=England
|Country=England
|Main contact forename=Will
|Main contact forename=Will
|Main contact surname=Groves
|Main contact surname=Groves
|Contact organisation=Environment Agency
|Contact organisation=Environment Agency
|Contact organisation url=www.environment-agency.gov.uk
|Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
|Partner organisations=Birmingham City Council; Witton Lodge Community Assoication; Friends of Witton Lakes
|Multi-site=No
|Multi-site=No
|Project picture=Full Spate 070612.jpg
|Picture description=post works in wet weather
|Project summary=Work included educating the community on environmental protection and promoting environmentally-friendly behaviour.
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Short Heath brook Before 2.jpg
|Caption=Before the project commenced
}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Full Spate 070612.jpg
|Caption=Post project during wet weather
}}
{{Case study image
|File name=SHB- Dry Weather.jpg
|Caption=Post project, during dry weather
}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=  River Tame from Conf of the two arms to R Blythe
}}
{{Site
|Name=Bleak Hill Recreation Ground
|WFD water body code=n/a
|Pre-project morphology=Straightened, Artificial channel,
|Heavily modified water body=Yes
|Protected species present=No
|Invasive species present=Yes
|Dominant hydrology=Quick run-off,
|Dominant substrate=Silt,
|River corridor land use=Parklands garden,
|Average bankfull channel width category=Less than 2 m
|Average bankfull channel depth category=Less than 0.5 m
}}
{{Project background
|Reach length directly affected=500
|Project started=2011/10/28
|Works started=2011/11/01
|Works completed=2012/02/17
|Total cost category=more than 10000 k€
|Total1 cost=126587
|Funding sources=Section 106 (planning gain) and Environment Agency
|Investigation and design cost category=5000 - 10000 k€
|Invst and design cost=10000
|Investigation and design Lead organisation=Birmingham City Council/ Environment Agency
|Investigation and design Other contact forename=Will
|Investigation and design Other contact surname=Groves
|Stakeholder1 engagement cost category=Less than 1 k€
|Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Birmingham City Council
|Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Chris
|Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Baker
|Works1 and supervision cost category=more than 10000 k€
|Wrk and supervision cost=126587
|Works and supervision Lead organisation=Birmingham City Cocncil
|Works and supervision Other contact forename=Iqbal
|Works and supervision Other contact surname=Sangha
|Post-project1 management and maintenance cost category=1000 - 5000 k€
|Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Birmingham City Council
|Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Iqbal
|Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Sangha
|Monitoring1 cost category=1 - 10 k€
|Monitoring Lead organisation=Environment Agency
|Monitoring Other contact forename=Will
|Monitoring Other contact surname=Groves
}}
{{Motivations
|Specific mitigation=To help the brook self cleanse to mitigate against misconnections.
|Hydromorphological quality elements=Width & depth variation,
|Biological quality elements=Invertebrates,
|Physico-chemical quality elements=Oxygen balance,
|Other motivation=Improving the local open space and engaging people with the brook so that they look after it in future.
}}
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank reprofiling,
|Floodplain / River corridor=Floodplain reconnection,
|Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of braided channel, Channel widening,
|Social measures=Community Education,
|Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Participation in decision process,
}}
}}
{{Case study subcatchment}}
{{Site}}
{{Project background}}
{{Motivations}}
{{Measures}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{End table}}
Line 31: Line 106:
{{Monitoring documents}}
{{Monitoring documents}}
{{Monitoring documents end}}
{{Monitoring documents end}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Additional Documents}}
{{Additional Documents}}
{{Additional Documents end}}
{{Additional Documents end}}
Line 38: Line 111:
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Toggle content end}}

Latest revision as of 16:03, 2 January 2019

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 52° 31' 44.13" N, 1° 51' 9.35" 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 In progress
Project web site
Themes Social benefits, Water quality, Urban
Country England
Main contact forename Will
Main contact surname Groves
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site http://https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
Partner organisations Birmingham City Council; Witton Lodge Community Assoication; Friends of Witton Lakes
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
post works in wet weather

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Work included educating the community on environmental protection and promoting environmentally-friendly behaviour.

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


Before the project commenced
Post project during wet weather
File:SHB- Dry Weather.jpg
Post project, during dry weather
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Humber
River basin Tame Anker and Mease

Subcatchment

River name River Tame from Conf of the two arms to R Blythe
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 100 - 200 m
Maximum altitude (m) 175175 m <br />0.175 km <br />17,500 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Suburban
Waterbody ID GB104028046840



Other case studies in this subcatchment: River Tame at Salford Park ("SMURF"), River Tame in Perry Hall playing fields ("SMURF"), SMURF Tame


Site

Name Bleak Hill Recreation Ground
WFD water body codes n/a
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology Straightened, Artificial channel
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body Yes
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present No
Invasive species present Yes
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology Quick run-off
Dominant substrate Silt
River corridor land use Parklands garden
Average bankfull channel width category Less than 2 m
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category Less than 0.5 m
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) 500500 m <br />0.5 km <br />50,000 cm <br />
Project started 2011/10/28
Works started 2011/11/01
Works completed 2012/02/17
Project completed
Total cost category more than 10000 k€
Total cost (k€) 126587126,587 k€ <br />126,587,000 € <br />
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Section 106 (planning gain) and Environment Agency

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design 5000 - 10000 k€ 1000010,000 k€ <br />10,000,000 € <br /> Birmingham City Council/ Environment Agency Will Groves
Stakeholder engagement and communication Less than 1 k€ Birmingham City Council Chris Baker
Works and works supervision more than 10000 k€ 126587126,587 k€ <br />126,587,000 € <br /> Birmingham City Cocncil Iqbal Sangha
Post-project management and maintenance 1000 - 5000 k€ Birmingham City Council Iqbal Sangha
Monitoring 1 - 10 k€ Environment Agency Will Groves



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure To help the brook self cleanse to mitigate against misconnections.
Hydromorphology Width & depth variation
Biology Invertebrates
Physico-chemical Oxygen balance
Other reasons for the project Improving the local open space and engaging people with the brook so that they look after it in future.


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Bank reprofiling
Floodplain / River corridor Floodplain reconnection
Planform / Channel pattern Creation of braided channel, Channel widening
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) Community Education
Other Participation in decision process


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