Case study:Lower River Roding Regeneration Project

From RESTORE
Jump to: navigation, search
4.00
(one vote)


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


Location: 51° 31' 42", 0° 4' 49"
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
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits, Urban
Country England
Main contact forename Toni
Main contact surname Scarr
Main contact user ID User:Ascarr
Contact organisation Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk
Partner organisations Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, London Borough of Newham, Natural England, Groundwork
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
Barking Creek near A13, Barking Creekmouth, Cuckolds Haven Nature Area, Mill Pool
Barking Barrier

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


This project was the first in Thames Region to be delivered by the Environment Agency using funding from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM, now DCLG) Sustainable Communities Fund.

In May 2004 we submitted a bid to the ODPM for £1million to undertake a series of environmental enhancements along the River Roding in its lower reaches where it passes through the London Boroughs of Barking & Dagenham and Newham. The funding bid was approved in October 2004 and the project had to be delivered by the end of the funding period in March 2006.

BACKGROUND The River Roding is a tributary of the River Thames. It rises to the north east of London and flows south through East London, through and along the boundary of a number of London Boroughs, before joining the River Thames in Barking. The lower reaches of the River Roding are tidal and the land adjacent to the River Roding throughout the project area is protected from tidal and fluvial flooding by flood defences. In addition to these defences the Barking Barrier protects the area from extreme high tides. This barrier is part of the Thames tidal defences. The Barking Barrier is situated at the confluence of the River Thames and the River Roding.

The Lower Roding Regeneration Project covers 4.5km of the River Roding where it flows through the London Boroughs of Barking and Dagenham and London Borough of Newham, between grid references TQ 436848 and TQ 458816.

The lower reaches of the River Roding are extremely urbanised and many of the riverside areas are of low environmental quality with poor aesthetic appeal and are difficult to access. Infrastructure barriers currently make it a difficult landscape to easily navigate and enjoy. These barriers include a railway line crossing and the A13 trunk road, creating east-west barriers, and the A406 North Circular Road running parallel to but set back from the west bank of the river.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


A number of environmental and amenity enhancements were delivered by this project. These included improved habitat for wildlife (including provision of Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitats), improved access to waterside areas, new seating/viewing areas, retreated and renewed flood defences and increased flood storage capacity.

This is an area of London where development has historically lead to the degradation of habitats along the River Roding and its tidal confluence with the Thames. It is therefore important that BAP habitat such as saltmarsh and mudflat is restored to the Creek.

MSC thesis reults: Small size restored intertidal habitat within heavy urbanised estuaries can function as relic marsh and provide a successful nursery and feeding grounds for juvenile fish. These fragmented habitats also help establish an intertidal migratory corridor through rivers, safeguarding fry from the high flows found in the central channel. This emphasises the importance of intertidal estuarine habitat in achieving ‘good ecological status/potential’ under WFD, and the added value they could bring if included within the network of Marine Protected Areas (MPA) planned for around in the UK coast.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


You can set back flood defences even in highly constrained locations. In particular the A13 site is located next bridge supporting a major road into London. The steel sheet piling has been removed and intertidal banks have been restored.


Image gallery


A13 during works
A13 post works
Barking Creekmouth
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Thames
River basin London

Subcatchment

River name Thames Middle
Area category Less than 10 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category
Maximum altitude (m)
Dominant geology
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Urban
Waterbody ID GB530603911402



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Barking Creek near A13, Barking Creekmouth, Chambers Wharf, Cuckolds Haven Nature Area, Greenwich Peninsula, Mill Pool, Saving Chiswick Eyot, Wandsworth Riverside Quarter


Site

Name Barking Creek
WFD water body codes GB530603911402
WFD (national) typology Intertidal
WFD water body name THAMES MIDDLE
Pre-project morphology Estuary (tidal)
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 European eel (Anguilla anguilla), Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax), flounder, phragmites
Dominant hydrology Tidal
Dominant substrate Estuarine mud
River corridor land use Urban
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) 4500
4,500 m
4.5 km
450,000 cm
Project started 2004/05/01
Works started 2005/10/01
Works completed 2006/03/31
Project completed 2006/03/31
Total cost category 1000 - 5000 k€
Total cost (k€) 1,000
1,000 k€
1,000,000 €
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Environment Agency, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (now DCLG) Sustainable Communities Fund

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

Supplementary funding information

In May 2004 we submitted a bid to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s for £1million to undertake a series of environmental enhancements along the River Roding in its lower reaches where it passes through the London Boroughs of Barking & Dagenham and Newham. The funding bid was approved in October 2004 and the project had to be delivered by the end of the funding period in March 2006.



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure Flood and coastal erosion protection
Hydromorphology Structure & condition of intertidal zone, Channel pattern/planform
Biology Fish: Age structure, Macrophytes
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project Community demand, Landscape enhancement


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications construction of new intertidal area
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) 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

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
http://www.ecrr.org/Portals/27/Publications/Estuary%20Edges%20-%20design%20advice.pdf Estuary Edges design guidance - this project is used as one of the examples

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information

Case_study:Barking Creekmouth

  • Tidal backwater creating two areas of BAP habitat: 0.1ha tidal mudflat habitat and 0.9ha of saltmarsh habitat.
  • New site entrance
  • Two seating/viewing areas with site information boards
  • Retreated flood defence providing approx. 15,000m3 additional storage
  • 310m new footpath


Case_study:Baking Creek near A13

  • Retreat and renewal of a 50m section of flood defence providing approximately 2000m3
  • Creation of approx. 390m2 of BAP habitat (including mudflat and saltmarsh) at the site


Case_study:Cuckolds Haven Nature Area

  • Create riverside seating area and info boards
  • New site entrance
  • 130m new footpath


Case_study:Mill Pool

  • 3-level intertidal terracing of 30m riverbank
  • Redesigned seating area