Case study:Hurst Park

From RESTORE
Revision as of 15:19, 6 June 2017 by Alexrrc (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 51° 24' 37.07" N, 0° 21' 38.87" 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 Planned
Project web site
Themes Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits
Country England
Main contact forename Jason
Main contact surname Debney
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation London Borough of Richmond upon Thames
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations TLS, Elmbridge Borough Council, Surrey County Council, Environment Agency, Local groups TLS, Local groups
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
The kind of natural floodplain that the project looked to create

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Restoration of natural floodplain; habitat creation; amenity; wetland creation Part of the TLS Hurst Park management plan.
Master plan completed. Consultation completed, funding bids being submitted

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

Catchment

River basin district Thames
River basin Maidenhead to Sunbury

Subcatchment

River name Thames (Egham to Teddington)
Area category 1000 - 10000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m) 7171 m <br />0.071 km <br />7,100 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Suburban
Waterbody ID GB106039023232



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Broom Road Recreation Ground, Chertsey meads, Hampton Court Palace, Teddington Wharf, The Barge Walk, Hampton Court


Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB106039023232
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Thames (Egham to Teddington)
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 2008/01/01
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category 1000 - 5000 k€
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 Community demand


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor Habitat creation, Creation of wetland
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) Aesthetics
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