Case study:Colfes School

From RESTORE
Revision as of 16:14, 9 April 2014 by Ivo (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 51° 26' 40.69" N, 0° 1' 49.48" 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 Planned
Project web site
Themes Fisheries, Flood risk management
Country England
Main contact forename Matthew
Main contact surname Blumler
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations This would be a collaborative project involving a partnership between local organisations and landowners, Green Chain, Walk and the Environment Agency.
Parent multi-site project
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

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Break river out of concrete channel, re-profile creating natural banks. Replace straightened course of the river with natural meanders. Allow more natural fluvial geomorphological processes to occur and increase habitat. Improved flood alleviation to downstream areas. Integrate with school sports facilities and buildings to provide educational facility for school that could be shared with others. Provide riverside walk to link existing river restorations in Chinbrook Meadows and Sutcliffe Park. Potential for extending the current GREEN CHAIN WALK through Chinbrook Meadows northwards into Greenwich and award winning Sutcliffe Park, alongside a naturalised urban river. Provide natural amenity and green pedestrian walk within urban environment. The Quaggy at this point lies within a straight concrete channel, inside a 6 metre strip enclosed by high fences. The fenced off strip runs through school and private playing fields. As a result the river is extremely degraded with poor aesthetic appeal, is devoid of geomorphological features of interest and has low ecological value. From the upper (southern) end it is possible to walk through largely green space to Chinbrook Meadows and a section of the Green Chain walk where the river was restored in 2002. From the lower (northern) end it is a short distance to Sutcliffe Park where the river was recently restored as part of a flood alleviation scheme. Enhancement would connect these two restored sections for wildlife and people, as well as providing new habitat and a direct educational facility within adjacent school playing fields.
Landowner details:
1. South section: Greenwich council – meadow. Approached and receptive. (Councillor Brian Woodcraft. Ward: Middle Park and Sutcliffe.)
2. Middle section and Left bank: Colfes school – playing fields and fenced off rough ground adjacent to river. Approached in 2005 – not receptive at that time
3. Middle and north section and right bank: Old Brockleians rugby club – playing fields and rough ground adjacent to the river. Approached and receptive. (Ron Tennant, previous president)
4. North section left bank: Possibly or previously Civil Service. Playing fields.
Key themes (Other):
1.) BAP. It will contribute towards the ‘Creating a Better Place’ objective to make proportionate progress towards BAP targets for wetland-related species and habitats’
2.) The works would also fall within the Agency’s duties as set out in the Environment Act 1995 to promote the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty and amenity of inland and coastal waters and of land associated with such waters.
3) Green Chain Walks – Would create the possibility of extending the green chain walks with a new riverside walk linking the boroughs of Bromley, Lewisham and Greenwich.

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


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) 750 m0.75 km <br />75,000 cm <br />
Project started 2008/01/01
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