Case study:Heybarnes Recreation Ground Cole Restoration: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=R Cole from Springfield to Hatchford-Kingshurst Brook
}}
{{Case study status
{{Case study status
|Approval status=Approved
|Approval status=Approved
Line 37: Line 34:
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Toggle content start}}
 
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=R Cole from Springfield to Hatchford-Kingshurst Brook
}}
{{Site
{{Site
|Name=Heybarnes Recreation Ground
|Name=Heybarnes Recreation Ground

Latest revision as of 12:27, 21 November 2024

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 52° 28' 4.69" N, 1° 49' 53.11" W
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, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Emily
Main contact surname Farrell
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Ebsford Environmental Ltd
Contact organisation web site http://https://ebsford.co.uk/
Partner organisations Enviornment Agency, University of Birmingham
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The River Cole is 34km in length, rising in northeast Worcestershire then flowing in a north easterly direction through Birmingham before joining the River Blythe in North Warwickshire. During the late Victorian era a section of the river in east Birmingham was diverted into a gun-barrel straight, engineered millstream and the original river was lost. During the summer of 2024 we undertook a project to transform a 1km section of this featureless millstream to allow it to behave more like a naturally functioning river. By re-profiling the banks and introducing a range of features including mid-channel bars, inset berms, large woody material and gravels we have kick started natural process. By making space for the river the forces of erosion and deposition, previously shackled, have now been freed. These introduced features will transform the uniform flow of this subreach with the development of pool-riffle sequences and flow variability. With time this engineered Victorian millstream will begin to resemble the original sinuous river that it replaced over 100 years ago.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


Baseline MoRPh10 survey undertaken in June 2022. Data available on Cartographer website Post-project MoRPh10 survey to be undertaken in summer 2025

Lessons learnt

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


Image gallery


River Cole gravel install.jpg
Project Environmental mitigation.png
River Cole Comparison.png
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Humber
River basin Tame Anker and Mease

Subcatchment

River name R Cole from Springfield to Hatchford-Kingshurst Brook
Area category 10 - 100 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 100 - 200 m
Maximum altitude (m) 154154 m <br />0.154 km <br />15,400 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Suburban
Waterbody ID GB104028042502



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Babbs Mill reed bed


Site

Name Heybarnes Recreation Ground
WFD water body codes GB104028042502
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Cole from Springfield to Hatchford-Kingshurst Brook Water Body
Pre-project morphology Straightened
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology Low gradient passively meandering
Heavily modified water body No
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present Yes
Invasive species present Yes
Species of interest Brown trout (Salmo trutta), bullhead (Cottus gobio)
Dominant hydrology Quick run-off
Dominant substrate Gravel
River corridor land use Parklands garden
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) 970970 m <br />0.97 km <br />97,000 cm <br />
Project started
Works started 2024-06-24
Works completed 2024-08-09
Project completed
Total cost category 100 - 500 k€
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources EA WEIF, WMCA Community Green Grant, University of Birmingham

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, Invasive species
Hydromorphology Quantity & dynamics of flow, Substrate conditions
Biology Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project Landscape enhancement, Community demand


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