Case study:Shoreham Harbour Shingle Bypassing and Recycling

From RESTORE
Jump to: navigation, search
0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 50° 49' 39", -0° 14' 57"
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 In progress
Project web site http://www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/64_shoreham.pdf
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits
Country England
Main contact forename Tony
Main contact surname Parker
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Shoreham Port
Contact organisation web site http://www.shoreham-port.co.uk/
Partner organisations Environment Agency
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The harbour arms at the seaward entrance of Shoreham Harbour in West Sussex represent a major obstruction to the natural process of littoral drift along the Sussex coast. Without action, foreshore levels to the east of the harbour would quickly drop to levels that threaten the stability of seawall structures and the build-up of beach material to the west would form a bar across and block the harbour entrance. Shingle bypassing has been carried out every 2 years since 1992. Littoral drift has caused the accumulation of material west of the harbour entrance with a corresponding lowering of beach levels to the east. Shingle transfer operations (see Map 1) have (mostly) prevented the collapse of coastal structures in areas of depletion. Collapse of these structures would rapidly endanger the ability of Shoreham Port, Shoreham Power Station and Shoreham Wastewater Treatment Works to function. A collapse would also threaten the A259 and residential properties behind it.

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



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
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
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€) £170,000
"£" is not declared as a valid unit of measurement for this property.
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Shoreham Port Authority

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 and coastal erosion protection
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other Beach nourishment
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement)
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