Case study:De-culverting Moselle Brook at Lordship Recreation Ground

From RESTORE
Revision as of 15:56, 27 February 2013 by Di at RRC (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° 35' 40.76" N, 0° 5' 11.85" 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, Social benefits
Country England
Main contact forename Mel
Main contact surname Challis
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk
Partner organisations Haringey Council, Friends of Lordship recreation ground
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Looking upstream along de-culverted section of Moselle Brook

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


culverted section of Moselle Brook through Lordship Recreation Ground was daylighted. New meandering channel dug with 30 degree banks planted with native species (mostly) . New channel planted with flowering rush, sedge and flag. Appearance of new channel looked excellant, however due to the number of mis-connectiosn upstream the channel wa sfull of sewage fungus and the water had a strong smell of raw sewage.

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.

Catchment and subcatchment

Select a catchment/subcatchment


Edit the catchment and subcatchment details
(affects all case studies in this subcatchment)

Subcatchment:Lee


Site

Edit site
Name Moselle Brook at Lordship Recreation Ground
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
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 No
Invasive species present Yes
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology Quick run-off
Dominant substrate Silt
River corridor land use Urban, Parklands garden
Average bankfull channel width category 2 - 5 m
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category 0.5 - 2 m
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category 1 - 10 m³/s
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category 0.001 - 0.01
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)


Project background

Edit project background
Reach length directly affected (m) 300300 m <br />0.3 km <br />30,000 cm <br />
Project started
Works started 2011/09/01
Works completed 2012/02/01
Project completed
Total cost category more than 10000 k€
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Help a London Park, Environment Agency

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

Edit reasons for restoration
Mitigation of a pressure culverted watercourse
Hydromorphology Channel pattern/planform, Quantity & dynamics of flow, Width & depth variation
Biology Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Taxonomic composition
Physico-chemical Specific non-synthetic pollutants, Oxygen balance, Nutrient concentrations
Other reasons for the project Socio-economic


Measures

Edit Measures
Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Bank re-grading, Culvert replacement/repair
Floodplain / River corridor Riparian planting, Sustainable urban drainage ponds (SUDs)
Planform / Channel pattern deculverting
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) Improved public access, Information panels for people, riverside walkway
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

Edit Hydromorphological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Biological quality elements

Edit biological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Physico-chemical quality elements

Edit 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

Edit Other responses
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative


Monitoring documents

Upload monitoring documents



Image gallery



Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents


Additional links and references

Edit links and references
Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information