Case study:Day Brook Rain Gardens: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(14 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Case study status | {{Case study status | ||
|Approval status= | |Approval status=Approved | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Location | {{Location | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
|Status=Complete | |Status=Complete | ||
|Project web site url= | |Project web site url=www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html | ||
|Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban | |Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban | ||
|Country=England | |Country=England | ||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
•Evaluate the effectiveness of the scheme as an engagement tool around the sources of urban diffuse pollution and flood risk. | •Evaluate the effectiveness of the scheme as an engagement tool around the sources of urban diffuse pollution and flood risk. | ||
•Highlight the role that retrofit SuDS can play in improving the quality and reducing the volume of surface water flowing to urban watercourses. | •Highlight the role that retrofit SuDS can play in improving the quality and reducing the volume of surface water flowing to urban watercourses. | ||
Increase community awareness of urban catchment challenges. | |||
|Monitoring surveys and results=For evaluation including results of resident acceptance survey and data of rain garden hydrological performance see http://www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html | |Monitoring surveys and results=For evaluation including results of resident acceptance survey and data of rain garden hydrological performance see http://www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html | ||
|Lessons learn=The following challenges were managed during the project; | |Lessons learn=The following challenges were managed during the project; | ||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
|File name=DSC01955.JPG | |File name=DSC01955.JPG | ||
|Caption=Day Brook rain garden | |Caption=Day Brook rain garden | ||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=DSC01964.JPG | |||
|Caption=Summer 2013 | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=DSC01946.JPG | |||
|Caption=Sign: Your brook starts here | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=DSC01959.JPG | |||
|Caption=Summer growth 2013 | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=DSC01450.JPG | |||
|Caption=Rain garden inlet | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=Soakaway.JPG | |||
|Caption=Soakaway construction | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery end}} | {{Image gallery end}} | ||
{{Toggle button}} | {{Toggle button}} | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
{{Site}} | |Subcatchment=Day Brook from Source to River Lean | ||
{{Project background}} | }} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Site | ||
{{Measures}} | |WFD water body code=GB104028052860 | ||
|WFD water body name=Day Brook from Source to River Lean | |||
|Heavily modified water body=No | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background | |||
|Works started=2013/05/01 | |||
|Works completed=2013/05/31 | |||
}} | |||
{{Motivations | |||
|Specific mitigation=Flood risk management, | |||
|Other motivation=Landscape enhancement, | |||
}} | |||
{{Measures | |||
|Floodplain / River corridor=Sustainable urban drainage ponds (SUDs), | |||
|Social measures=Awareness raising, | |||
}} | |||
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | ||
{{End table}} | {{End table}} |
Latest revision as of 11:49, 5 June 2017
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | http://www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html |
Themes | Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | John |
Main contact surname | Brewington |
Main contact user ID | User:John Brewington |
Contact organisation | Environment Agency |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk |
Partner organisations | Groundwork Greater Nottingham, Nottingham City Council, Severn Trent Water |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
This pilot retrofit SuDS project was a result of collaboration between the Environment Agency, Nottingham City Council, Groundwork Greater Nottingham and Severn Trent Water. The construction phase was completed in May 2013.
The scheme was designed to achieve the following objectives;
•Document and evaluate the design and construction of a series of rain gardens within an existing highway setting. •Maximise surface water interception, attenuation and infiltration. •Test the effectiveness of rain gardens in managing surface water from the public highway. •Encourage participation from local residents in the design and future management of the rain gardens. •Evaluate the effectiveness of the scheme as an engagement tool around the sources of urban diffuse pollution and flood risk. •Highlight the role that retrofit SuDS can play in improving the quality and reducing the volume of surface water flowing to urban watercourses.
Increase community awareness of urban catchment challenges.
Monitoring surveys and results
For evaluation including results of resident acceptance survey and data of rain garden hydrological performance see http://www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html
Lessons learnt
The following challenges were managed during the project;
•Limited time to design and construct the scheme. •Varying support for the scheme amongst residents and general lack of understanding of how surface water contributes to flooding and poor water quality. •Safety concerns – residents and safety audit helped refine rain garden design.
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Day Brook Restoration - Gedling
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
|