Case study:Ravensbury Park: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(14 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 12: Line 12:
|Location=51.392463684082, -0.168462008237839
|Location=51.392463684082, -0.168462008237839
}}
}}
{{Project_overview
{{Project overview
|Status=
|Status=Planned
   
|Themes=Fisheries, Social benefits
   
|Country=England
      Complete
|Main contact forename=Joanna
|Project web site url=
|Main contact surname=Heisse
     
|Contact organisation=Environment Agency
|Themes=
|Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
     
|Partner organisations=Environment Agency, Merton Council
|Country=
|Multi-site=No
      England
|Project summary=Bank naturalisation and enhancements; tree works; backwater enhancement. The river through the park has hard edges which could be enhanced to create more of a marginal edge. Several channels run through the park which could be enhanced to improve their value as wildlife corridors.
|Main contact forename=
      Joanna
|Main contact surname=
      Heisse
|Main contact id=
     
|Contact organisation=
      Environment Agency
|Contact organisation url=
     
|Partner organisations=
     
|Multi-site=
     
|Name of parent multi-site project=
     
|Project picture=
     
|Picture description=
     
|Project summary=
     
}}
}}
{{Image_gallery}}
{{Image_gallery}}
Line 50: Line 28:
{{Toggle_button}}
{{Toggle_button}}
{{Toggle_content_start}}
{{Toggle_content_start}}
{{Case_study_subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=
|Subcatchment=Wandle (Croydon to Wandsworth) and the R. Gravney
   
   
   
   
   
   
     
}}
}}
{{Site
{{Site
|Name=
|WFD water body code=GB106039023460
   
|WFD water body name=Wandle (Croydon to Wandsworth) and the R. Gravney
   
|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=
|Reach length directly affected=300 m
   
|Project started=2008/01/01
   
|Funding sources=Viridor funding, Thames Water rehabilitation fund
      300 m
|Project started=
      2008/01/01
|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=Riparian development
   
   
     
|Biological quality elements=
     
|Physico-chemical quality elements=
     
|Specific mitigation=
     
|Other motivation=
     
}}
}}
{{Measures
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank reprofiling
   
|Floodplain / River corridor=Tree management
   
|Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of backwater
     
|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 13:46, 1 November 2018

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 51° 23' 32.87" N, 0° 10' 6.46" 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 Planned
Project web site
Themes Fisheries, Social benefits
Country England
Main contact forename Joanna
Main contact surname Heisse
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site http://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
Partner organisations Environment Agency, Merton Council
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Bank naturalisation and enhancements; tree works; backwater enhancement. The river through the park has hard edges which could be enhanced to create more of a marginal edge. Several channels run through the park which could be enhanced to improve their value as wildlife corridors.

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


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Thames
River basin London

Subcatchment

River name Wandle (Croydon to Wandsworth) and the R. Gravney
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 200 - 500 m
Maximum altitude (m) 282282 m <br />0.282 km <br />28,200 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Suburban
Waterbody ID GB106039023460



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Beddington Park, Beddington Park Enhancements, Boulder Pool and Plough Lane, Durand Close, EDF Weir removal, Eel Pass over tilting weir at Ravensbury Park, Garratt Park, Hackbridge Restoration, Hackbridge weir notch, King Georges Park... further results


Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB106039023460
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Wandle (Croydon to Wandsworth) and the R. Gravney
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) 300 m0.3 km <br />30,000 cm <br />
Project started 2008/01/01
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Viridor funding, Thames Water rehabilitation fund

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
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure Riparian development
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Bank reprofiling
Floodplain / River corridor Tree management
Planform / Channel pattern Creation of backwater
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