Case study:Broadwater Brook

From RESTORE
Revision as of 15:35, 24 August 2021 by Ascarr (talk | contribs) (Ascarr moved page Case study:Broadwater Brook 2 to Case study:Broadwater Brook)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
4.50
(2 votes)


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


Location: 50° 49' 32.02" N, 0° 21' 3.73" 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 Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Social benefits, Water quality, Urban
Country England
Main contact forename Peter
Main contact surname King
Main contact user ID User:Oartpk
Contact organisation Ouse & Adur Rivers Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.oart.org.uk
Partner organisations Sompting Estate Trust, Environment Agency SSD, Heritage Lottery Fund
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
New River Channel

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


This urban chalk stream project has realigned the course of the Broadwater Brook, removing it from underground pipes and setting a new route through agricultural fields. Previously degraded from pollution entering from industrial areas and the main road network we have installed sediment traps at the upstream extent and have ensured vegetation establishment in the channel to further filter pollutants. Allowing for low flows (as a ephemeral stream) the stream is narrow with marginal shelves to provide wetland habitat whilst being flooded during heavy rainfall. The surrounding land has been transformed from arable maize fields into 6.9ha of wildflower meadow with 2.2km of new hedgerow and 500 trees forming a shaw woodland. Additional habitat in the form of three ponds, a re-wilding zone and scrapes have been formed along the riparian zone. The project tackled land contamination from neighbouring landfill along with accumulations of arsenic from previous land use. A mains sewer was realigned and mitigation for a chemical effluent pipe and mains power cable were also needed to complete the project which also had to content with a 1:3000 gradient and artificially raised ground through the centre of the site.

The project has been co-designed and delivered with the local community with numerous activities and events inspiring and raising awareness of chalk streams and the impact of urban living which has inspired behavioural change. Over 1000 members of the local community have been involved in the project whether through volunteering on practical tasks, attending educational events or being involved in one of the citizen science monitoring programmes. The site is now open to the public for the first time along a newly created Sompting Brooks River Trail which includes interpretation and artworks depicting the areas historical association with water.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


We have been monitoring the effectiveness of silt traps within the system along with taking water sample for chemical analysis. In addition we have undertaken BMWP sampling for freshwater invertebrates as well as ecological surveys for reptiles and amphibians, fish, birds, dragonflies, bats, harvest mice and macrophytes. All of these were also undertaken for 2 years before the project started to generate a baseline status for the site. Results show that, across all parameters, water quality is significantly improved and that the sediment traps are working in all but the most extreme flow conditions. Species diversity across the site has grown from a recorded 100 species in 2017/18 to 535 species in 2021. Five fish species have been recorded within the new channel (from none within the old channel). The site has also recorded the first Scarce Blue Tailed Damselfly in Sussex for 125 years, one of 18 species of Odonata now recorded on the Brooks. Water quality sampling has revealed significant amounts of nitrate being released from the aquifer over winter which has highlighted a need for further investigation of land management practices to the north of the project area.

We have also been monitoring impacts on the local community and results show a better appreciation and understanding of the water environment, that co-design and delivery has ensured guardianship of the site into the future and that providing outdoor opportunities in heavily urbanised areas is of great value to wellbeing and community cohesion. All results of the project will be available on the website from January 2022 - www.oart.org.uk/epic

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


  • We used local contractors to provide ECI assistance during the development of designs, this resulted in large costs increases (even from the ECI) at tender and we would ensure that more consideration is given to the right contractor providing this advice from the beginning of the project.
  • Relied on existing relationships and partnerships to provide solutions to constraints on site which meant no legal framework was in place for agreed actions and organizations changed their approach to elements of the project at the last minute. In future we would ensure that legal agreements are in place around service mitigation prior to appointing a contractor.
  • We did not appreciate or appropriately consider the ground contamination constraints at an early enough stage. A lack of prior experience of these issues and relying on previous reports led to misunderstanding the costs and constraints this would cause. For future projects we would ensure, where potential land contamination is present, that early involvement of experts is obtained, and budgets reflect possible additional costs.
  • We have also learnt that, through perseverance, projects which many believe to be unachievable due to costs and constraints can be delivered in a manner which is cost beneficial and provide multiple benefits to people and wildlife.


Image gallery


Upstream of Industrial Estate.jpg
Downstream Industrial Estate.png
Downstream.jpg
Silt traps.jpg
Wildflower Meadow.jpg
River Banks.jpg
009.jpeg
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district South East
River basin Adur and Ouse

Subcatchment

River name Teville Stream
Area category 10 - 100 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 200 - 500 m
Maximum altitude (m) 240240 m <br />0.24 km <br />24,000 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Improved grassland
Waterbody ID GB107041011940



Site

Name Broadwater Brooks
WFD water body codes GB107041011940
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Teville Stream
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body Yes
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present Yes
Invasive species present Yes
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate Clay, Sand
River corridor land use Intensive agriculture (arable)
Average bankfull channel width category
Average bankfull channel width (m) 5.05 m <br />0.005 km <br />500 cm <br />
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m) 0.40.4 m <br />4.0e-4 km <br />40 cm <br />
Mean discharge category
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category Less than 0.001
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)


Project background

Reach length directly affected (m) 10001,000 m <br />1 km <br />100,000 cm <br />
Project started 01/01/2017
Works started 2019/06/10
Works completed 2019/08/16
Project completed 2021/12/31
Total cost category 100 - 500 k€
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources National Lottery Heritage Fund, Environment Agency, Rampion Offshore Wind Ltd

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design 10 - 50 k€ Ouse & Adur Rivers Trust Peter King
Stakeholder engagement and communication 1 - 10 k€ Ouse & Adur Rivers Trust Peter King
Works and works supervision 100 - 500 k€ Ouse & Adur Rivers Trust Peter King
Post-project management and maintenance 10 - 50 k€ Ouse & Adur Rivers Trust Peter King
Monitoring 10 - 50 k€ Ouse & Adur Rivers Trust Peter King



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology Continuity of sediment transport
Biology Fish, Invertebrates
Physico-chemical Nutrient concentrations, Oxygen balance
Other reasons for the project Recreation


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Channel realignment
Floodplain / River corridor Channel realignment, Conservation measures and environmental improvement, Creation of multi stage channel, Habitat creation
Planform / Channel pattern Channel realignment, Creation of new channel, Habitat creation, Habitat restoration, Improvement of channel morphology
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions Agricultural business changed its way of working, Arable reversion to wildflower meadow, Clean-up days, Diffuse pollution mitigation, Easier management, Ensuring biodiversity, Monitoring strategy
Social measures (incl. engagement) Active involvement of local interests groups and land owners, Agreement with the owners, Awareness raising, Awareness raising by a sign, Citizen participation in the restoration project, Community Education, Community Events, Community Litter-picking work, Community based management, Community consultation, Community education (talks and workshops, Community involvement, Creation of a path alongside the river, Decreased flood risk, Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, Engagement with schools, Improved public access, Information panels for people
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative
Continuity of sediment transport Yes Yes No Yes No Improvement

Biological quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative
Fish: Species composition Yes Yes No Yes No Improvement
Invertebrates: Taxonomic composition Yes Yes No Yes Yes Improvement

Physico-chemical quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative
Nutrient concentrations Yes Yes No Yes Yes Improvement
Oxygen balance Yes Yes No Yes Yes Improvement

Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative
Bat Survey Yes Yes No Yes No Improvement
Birds Yes Yes No Yes No Improvement
Concentration phosphate, Chloride and Nitrogen Yes Yes No Yes Yes Improvement
Macroinvertebrates (IBMWP) Yes Yes No Yes Yes Improvement


Monitoring documents



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information