Case study:River Roding at Ray Lodge Park: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
{{Site | {{Site | ||
|Name=Ray Lodge Park | |Name=Ray Lodge Park | ||
|WFD water body code=GB106037028180 | |||
|WFD water body name=Roding (Cripsey Brook to Loxford Water) | |||
|Pre-project morphology=Single channel,Impounded,High width:depth | |Pre-project morphology=Single channel,Impounded,High width:depth | ||
|Reference morphology=Single channel, Sinuous, Pool-riffle, | |Reference morphology=Single channel, Sinuous, Pool-riffle, | ||
|Heavily modified water body=Yes | |Heavily modified water body=Yes | ||
|Protected species present=No | |Protected species present=No |
Revision as of 12:23, 9 August 2012
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Location: 51° 36' 59.43" N, 0° 3' 11.60" E
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Nick |
Main contact surname | Elbourne |
Main contact user ID | User:NickRRC |
Contact organisation | River Restoration Centre |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.therrc.co.uk |
Partner organisations | Environment Agency |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
Edit project overview to modify the project summary.
After works on a nearby motorway (the M11) in the 1970's ans 1980's, the River Roding was artificially diverted and straightened, resulting in poor quality wildlife habitat. The restoration project looked to address this by creating new habitats for a range of species including water voles, dragonflies and numerous fish species, without a reduction in flood protection. This was achieved through bank re-profiling, backwater creation and planting of the rivers banks.
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.
Catchment and subcatchment
Select a catchment/subcatchment
Edit the catchment and subcatchment details
(affects all case studies in this subcatchment)
Site
Name | Ray Lodge Park |
---|---|
WFD water body codes | GB106037028180 |
WFD (national) typology | |
WFD water body name | Roding (Cripsey Brook to Loxford Water) |
Pre-project morphology | Single channel, Impounded, High width:depth |
Reference morphology | Single channel, Sinuous, Pool-riffle |
Desired post project morphology | |
Heavily modified water body | Yes |
National/international site designation | |
Local/regional site designations | |
Protected species present | No |
Invasive species present | No |
Species of interest | |
Dominant hydrology | Quick run-off |
Dominant substrate | Bedrock |
River corridor land use | Urban |
Average bankfull channel width category | 5 - 10 m |
Average bankfull channel width (m) | |
Average bankfull channel depth category | 0.5 - 2 m |
Average bankfull channel depth (m) | |
Mean discharge category | |
Mean annual discharge (m3/s) | 1.851.85 m³/s <br />1,850 l/s <br /> |
Average channel gradient category | |
Average channel gradient | |
Average unit stream power (W/m2) |
Project background
Reach length directly affected (m) | 150 m0.15 km <br />15,000 cm <br /> |
---|---|
Project started | 2007/08/01 |
Works started | 2007/10/01 |
Works completed | 2008/01/01 |
Project completed | |
Total cost category | 100 - 500 k€ |
Total cost (k€) | 175 k€175,000 € <br /> |
Benefit to cost ratio | |
Funding sources | London Borough of Redbridge, Environment Agency |
Cost for project phases
Phase | cost category | cost exact (k€) | Lead organisation | Contact forename | Contact surname |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Investigation and design | Environment Agency | ||||
Stakeholder engagement and communication | Environment Agency | ||||
Works and works supervision | Environment Agency | ||||
Post-project management and maintenance | Environment Agency | ||||
Monitoring | Environment Agency |
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
Structural measures
| |
---|---|
Bank/bed modifications | Removal of revetments, Depth variations, Planting, Re-profiling |
Floodplain / River corridor | Removal of embankments |
Planform / Channel pattern | Creation of backwater, Creation of pond, Sinuosity |
Other | |
Non-structural measures
| |
Management interventions | |
Social measures (incl. engagement) | |
Other | Participation in maintenance, Consultation, Participation in design |
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 | |||
Public Accessibility | Yes | Yes | Improvement |
Monitoring documents
Image gallery
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Link | Description |
---|---|
http://www.therrc.co.uk/case studies/roding%20at%20redbridge.pdf | River Restoration Centre Case Study |