Case study:Slow the Flow, Broadland Rivers, Norfolk

From RESTORE
Revision as of 11:10, 1 August 2016 by Lcollison (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: none specified



Project overview

Edit project overview
Status Complete
Project web site
Themes Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Rory
Main contact surname Sanderson
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations
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.


Installation of low tech, low cost structures designed to capture, slow and improve the quality of run-off from fields and rural roads: Rural sustainable drainage systems(SuDs) slow down or prevent the transport of pollutants to watercourse by breaking the delivery pathway between the pollutant source and the receptor. This project was funded by DEFRA's Catchment Partnership Action Fund, supported by the environment programme team. There are 42 water bodies in the broadland rivers catchment that are not achieving good ecological due to diffuse pollution.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


By intercepting run off and trapping sediment, all these schemes will help achieve better water quality by preventing the loss of soil, chemicals, nutrients, and faecal organisms. A further benefit is their ability to temporarily capture water and slow down flow. This can reduce localised flooding. 66 Landowners were engaged through a workshop and series of presentations to identify suitable sites, raising the profile of the effectiveness of rural SuDs schemes. 6 schemes were then taken forward and simple measures installed to reduce run-off. Some of the schemes were completed under a regulatory position statement related to the disposal of waste sediment from distilling. This ensured that regulation was proportionate to the risk, reflecting the small scale of the scheme and the overall environmental benefit.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


With close liaison with permitting and enforcement colleagues it is essential to apply the relevant legislation appropriately. This is used as a pilot scheme for other projects which are linked with WWF/Waterlife/Coca Cola over the next 3 years.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB30535981, GB105034055700, GB105034055730, GB30536989, GB105034055881
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body No
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present No
Invasive species present No
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 more than 10000 k€ 3100031,000 k€ <br />31,000,000 € <br />
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