Case study:Clayton Vale: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site}} | ||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations | ||
|Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration, | |||
|Biological quality elements=Fish, | |||
}} | |||
{{Measures}} | {{Measures}} | ||
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} |
Revision as of 14:44, 13 May 2014
Project overview
Status | In progress |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits, Urban |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Oliver |
Main contact surname | Southgate |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Environment Agency |
Contact organisation web site | |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
Manchester City Council identified that the Clayton Vale portion of the study area (east of Bank Bridge Road) was occupied by a historical landfill site, which was used for the disposal of ash cinders from the Stuart Street Power Station and as a municipal landfill. Consultants Atkins are in the process of undertaking ground investigations to determine leachate, groundwater and soil contamination including waste characterisation testing to determine the status of these materials and to allow an effective remediation strategy to be developed for the any river channel/corridor restoration works and to prevent the creation of new pollutant linkages or the exacerbation of existing ones, in upstream demonstration area.
It will be a huge achievement if we can restore this most heavily degraded section of waterbody, but the aspiration is to create a safe riverine environment for all, reconnect and integrate the river corridor back with the adjoining greenspace and public parks, and restore the river so that it is capable of supporting diverse aquatic fauna once more.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Philips Park, River Irwell Restoration Project
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
|