Case study:Haynes Park: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Hazel Wilson (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Site | {{Site | ||
|WFD water body code=GB106037028100 | |||
|WFD water body name=Rom / Beam (from Ravensbourne confluence to Thames) | |||
|Heavily modified water body=No | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|WFD water body code= | |Invasive species present=No | ||
|WFD water body name= | |||
|Heavily modified water body= | |||
|Protected species present= | |||
|Invasive species present= | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project background | {{Project background | ||
Line 88: | Line 45: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Measures | {{Measures | ||
|Bank and bed modifications measure= | |Bank and bed modifications measure=Removing of concrete structures, Weir removal | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Hydromorphological_quality_elements_header}} | {{Hydromorphological_quality_elements_header}} |
Latest revision as of 12:25, 27 October 2015
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Planned |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Social benefits |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Becca |
Main contact surname | O’Shea |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Environment Agency |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
Removal of three weir structures, removal of concrete bank and bed protection works. The river is in a semi-natural state though concrete bank protection works have been undertaken in the past and the river bed has also been lined with concrete in places. Three concrete flumes (same as those stupidly put in Harrow Lodge Park) break to continuity of the river and probably are to deal with the change of plan form gradient.
Manholes were observed in close proximity to the watercourse, possibly indicating a sewer pipe. However, huge gains could be made within the confines of this space, although it may be that bank reprofiling would have to be adapted. Works to the left bank are constrained due to it being owned by numerous different people whose properties abut the watercourse. It is unclear if this has always been the case or whether land take has taken place over the years.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Dagenham Washlands Phase 2, Harrow Lodge Park
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
|