Case study:Albany Park: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Case study status
{{Case study status}}
|Approval status=Approved
{{Location}}
}}
{{Project overview}}
{{Location
|Location=51.6682925025019, -0.03331565864322039
}}
{{Project overview
|Status=Complete
|Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Urban
|Country=England
|Main contact forename=Matilda
|Main contact surname=Biddulph
|Main contact id=mbiddulph
|Contact organisation=Environment Agency
|Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
|Partner organisations=London Borough of Enfield,
|Multi-site=No
|Project picture=Albany Park Before and After.png
|Picture description=Left: pre-restoration concrete channel Right: post-restoration sinuous, natural channel.
|Project summary=A partnership project between London Borough of Enfield (LBE) and the Environment Agency (EA; Biodiversity & Geomorphology team from Hertfordshire and North London Area). Funded by LBE, EA and the Greater London Authority (GLA). The environmental and flood risk benefits allowed for funding, and the project came to approximately £1.5million.
 
The Turkey Brook is a medium sized, clay-based catchment flowing initially through rural grassland into a dense urban area of London, before meeting the River Lee in Enfield. It is failing under the Water Framework Directive for: macrophytes and phytobenthos, phosphate, and drought/low flows, and hydromorphology. The river was confined in a steep sided concrete channel along the edge of the park, with very little biodiversity, habitat or connection with groundwater. The general public often did not even know it was there, or if they did they regarded it as an open sewer.
 
The Albany Park Restoration Project aimed to restore 400m of the Turkey Brook, by breaking it out of concrete and creating a natural, sinuous river through the park. The river now flows through a wide, shallow river corridor made up primarily of the Kempton Park Gravel Member, which allows the channel to reform and reshape itself during high flows until it reaches an equilibrium. The urban, flashy nature of the catchment means that intensive geomorphological work is achieved during each high flow event.
 
The river is now connected laterally with it's floodplain and riparian zone, and vertically with the groundwater and a hyporheic zone. The natural cross section and improved connectivity has improved the Turkey Brook's resilience to low flows, and its ability to store water and attenuate high flows. The constructed wetlands and SuDs features around the park has hopefully also improved water quality, but ongoing monitoring will determine the success of this.
 
The river is now a valuable public amenity in an otherwise heavily urban area, and provides an educational resource for local schools.
|Monitoring surveys and results=As the project was completed in the Summer of 2021, monitoring is still on going. Invertebrates, macrophytes, fish and water quality will be monitored before and after for a number of years, alongside morph surveys with accompanying drone footages to show the change in channel shape over time.
|Lessons learn=The project was severely delayed due to a combination of Covid-19 and wet weather, there were also issues with securing planning permission due to the large number of stakeholders involved.
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Case study image
{{Case study image
Line 50: Line 22:
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Case study subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment}}
|Subcatchment=Cuffley Brook and Turkey Brook
{{Site}}
}}
{{Project background}}
{{Site
{{Motivations}}
|WFD water body code=GB106038033180
{{Measures}}
|WFD water body name=Cuffley Brook and Turkey Brook
|Heavily modified water body=No
|Protected species present=No
|Invasive species present=No
}}
{{Project background
|Reach length directly affected=400
|Project started=01/04/2016
|Works started=2020/08/01
|Works completed=2021/08/01
|Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€
|Funding sources=Local council, Greater London Authority, Environment Agency environmental funding and flood risk funding.
}}
{{Motivations
|Hydromorphological quality elements=Channel pattern/planform,
}}
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Creation of berms, Creation of backwaters,
|Floodplain / River corridor=River naturalisation, Reedbed creation, Scrapes, Fish habitat restoration,
|Social measures=Recreation,
}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{End table}}

Revision as of 16:34, 27 July 2022

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

5.00
(2 votes)


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


Location: none specified



Project overview

Edit project overview
Status
Project web site
Themes
Country
Main contact forename
Main contact surname
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects 		No
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

This case study hasn’t got any project summary, you can add some by editing the project overview.

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


Drone Photograph during early phase of construction
P04 Albany downstream river breakthrough (looking upstream).JPG
Pre-Restoration.jpeg
During construction.jpeg
Post restoration.jpeg
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
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)
Project started
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
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
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
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


Retrieved from "https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Albany_Park&oldid=48404"