Case study:Bakenhof Dyke reconstruction: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(11 intermediate revisions by one other user 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=Bakenhof Dyke reconstruction
|Status=Complete
|Status=Complete
|Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity
|Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity
|Country=Netherlands
|Country=Netherlands
|Main contact forename=Nick
|Main contact forename=Nick
|Main contact surname=Eldon
|Main contact surname=Elbourne
|Main contact id=NickRRC
|Contact organisation=River Restoration Centre
|Contact organisation=River Restoration Centre
|Multi-site=No
|Multi-site=No
|Project picture=Bakenhof luchtfotoaug02O.jpg
|Picture description=Following realignment of the dyke
|Project summary=Dike realignment took place utilising an area of former brickwork factory. The floodplain was widened by 200 meters and a new secondary channel created.  The works also improved habitat connections, by increasing vegetation in the floodplain which will mature over time. The site is now popular for recreation, specifically for water sports, with Arnhem residents.
The channel capacity has increased to allow for significant changes in flow. There has been little effect on biological quality with regard to Water Framework Directive targets, as fish and benthic invertebrates were not monitored before the works were carried out.
}}
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Luchtfoto BA 010827.jpg
|Caption=During construction
}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Case study subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=Rhine
|Subcatchment=Rhine
}}
}}
{{Site}}
{{Site
{{Project background}}
|Name=Bakenhof
{{Motivations}}
|Heavily modified water body=No
{{Measures}}
|Protected species present=No
|Invasive species present=No
}}
{{Project background
|Reach length directly affected=1500
|Project started=2001
|Project completed=2004/01/01
}}
{{Motivations
|Specific mitigation=Urbanisation,
}}
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=creation of secondary channel
|Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of backwaters,
}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{End table}}
Line 32: Line 58:
{{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 39: Line 63:
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Toggle content end}}

Latest revision as of 06:37, 6 September 2013

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 51° 58' 0.73" N, 5° 55' 37.43" E
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 Complete
Project web site
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity
Country Netherlands
Main contact forename Nick
Main contact surname Elbourne
Main contact user ID User:NickRRC
Contact organisation River Restoration Centre
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Following realignment of the dyke

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Dike realignment took place utilising an area of former brickwork factory. The floodplain was widened by 200 meters and a new secondary channel created. The works also improved habitat connections, by increasing vegetation in the floodplain which will mature over time. The site is now popular for recreation, specifically for water sports, with Arnhem residents. The channel capacity has increased to allow for significant changes in flow. There has been little effect on biological quality with regard to Water Framework Directive targets, as fish and benthic invertebrates were not monitored before the works were carried out.

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


During construction
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Rhine
River basin Rhine

Subcatchment

River name Rhine
Area category 1000 - 10000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 1000 - 2000 m
Maximum altitude (m)
Dominant geology Siliceous
Ecoregion Central Plains
Dominant land cover Grassland, Urban
Waterbody ID



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Amerongse Bovenpolder, Blauwe Kamer, Room for the River, Ruppoldingen, Upper Main catchment restoration


Site

Name Bakenhof
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
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) 15001,500 m <br />1.5 km <br />150,000 cm <br />
Project started 2001
Works started
Works completed
Project completed 2004/01/01
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources

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 Urbanisation
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications creation of secondary channel
Floodplain / River corridor Creation of backwaters
Planform / Channel pattern
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