Case study:Day Brook Rain Gardens

From RESTORE
Jump to: navigation, search
4.50
(2 votes)


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


Location: 52° 59' 31", -1° 8' 44"
Edit location
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 http://www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban
Country England
Main contact forename John
Main contact surname Brewington
Main contact user ID User:John Brewington
Contact organisation Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk
Partner organisations Groundwork Greater Nottingham, Nottingham City Council, Severn Trent Water
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Day Brook rain garden

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


This pilot retrofit SuDS project was a result of collaboration between the Environment Agency, Nottingham City Council, Groundwork Greater Nottingham and Severn Trent Water. The construction phase was completed in May 2013.

The scheme was designed to achieve the following objectives;

•Document and evaluate the design and construction of a series of rain gardens within an existing highway setting. •Maximise surface water interception, attenuation and infiltration. •Test the effectiveness of rain gardens in managing surface water from the public highway. •Encourage participation from local residents in the design and future management of the rain gardens. •Evaluate the effectiveness of the scheme as an engagement tool around the sources of urban diffuse pollution and flood risk. •Highlight the role that retrofit SuDS can play in improving the quality and reducing the volume of surface water flowing to urban watercourses.

Increase community awareness of urban catchment challenges.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


For evaluation including results of resident acceptance survey and data of rain garden hydrological performance see http://www.susdrain.org/case-studies/case_studies/nottingham_green_streets_retrofit_rain_garden_project.html

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


The following challenges were managed during the project;

•Limited time to design and construct the scheme. •Varying support for the scheme amongst residents and general lack of understanding of how surface water contributes to flooding and poor water quality. •Safety concerns – residents and safety audit helped refine rain garden design.


Image gallery


Day Brook rain garden
Summer 2013
Sign: Your brook starts here
Summer growth 2013
Rain garden inlet
Soakaway construction
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Humber
River basin Lower Trent and Erewash

Subcatchment

River name Day Brook from Source to River Lean
Area category 10 - 100 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 100 - 200 m
Maximum altitude (m) 153
153 m
0.153 km
15,300 cm
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Suburban
Waterbody ID GB104028052860



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Day Brook Restoration - Gedling


Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB104028052860
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Day Brook from Source to River Lean
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 2013/05/01
Works completed 2013/05/31
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 Flood risk management
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project Landscape enhancement


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor Sustainable urban drainage ponds (SUDs)
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) Awareness raising
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