Case study:Wylrebeek: Difference between revisions
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Case study status |Approval status=Draft }} {{Location |Location=51.352750220845756, 6.152518817405452 }} {{Project overview |Project title=Wylrebeek |Status=Complete |Theme...") |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
|Status=Complete | |Status=Complete | ||
|Themes=Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Spatial planning | |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Spatial planning | ||
Line 14: | Line 13: | ||
|Contact organisation=Waterschap Limburg | |Contact organisation=Waterschap Limburg | ||
|Contact organisation url=waterschaplimburg.nl | |Contact organisation url=waterschaplimburg.nl | ||
|Name of parent multi-site project=Building with nature measures in streams | |||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
| | |Project summary=This stream had to be rerouted because of the construction of highway A73. It was constructed in a wide sandy strip. The sand was kept in place with wooden boards until vegetation was sufficiently developed to keep the sediment fixated. A weir has been removed to promote higher flow velocities. A fish passage used to cause excessive sedimentation, which has been fixed by creating a preferential flowpath. | ||
|Monitoring surveys and results=The boards kept the sediment in its desired place. Once a sufficient vegetation cover was established, the stream could flow freely without regulation or undesirable erosion. In the current landscape, the stream is more prominent. | |||
|Project title=Wylrebeek | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | {{Image gallery}} | ||
Line 22: | Line 24: | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site | ||
|Name=Wylrebeek (Wilderbeek) | |||
|Heavily modified water body=Yes | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
|Dominant substrate=Sand | |||
|River corridor land use=Urban, Parklands garden, | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} |
Latest revision as of 14:50, 19 March 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Spatial planning |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | Arnoud |
Main contact surname | Soetens |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Limburg |
Contact organisation web site | http://waterschaplimburg.nl |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
This stream had to be rerouted because of the construction of highway A73. It was constructed in a wide sandy strip. The sand was kept in place with wooden boards until vegetation was sufficiently developed to keep the sediment fixated. A weir has been removed to promote higher flow velocities. A fish passage used to cause excessive sedimentation, which has been fixed by creating a preferential flowpath.
Monitoring surveys and results
The boards kept the sediment in its desired place. Once a sufficient vegetation cover was established, the stream could flow freely without regulation or undesirable erosion. In the current landscape, the stream is more prominent.
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and 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
|