Case study:TEST Deculverting the Texas Valley Stream 1

From RESTORE
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: 59° 58' 44.87" N, 11° 14' 29.90" E
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 Economic aspects, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Water quality, Urban
Country Norway
Main contact forename Kari
Main contact surname Nordkvinne
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation County Governor of Oslo og Viken
Contact organisation web site http://https://www.statsforvalteren.no/en/oslo-og-viken/
Partner organisations NINA, NIVA
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
2. The Texas Valley stream one year after daylighting. July 26th 2017. Photo: Kari Nordkvinne/NIVA.

Project summary

This case study hasn’t got any project summary, you can add some by editing the project overview.

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 Texasbekken
WFD water body codes 006-189-R
WFD (national) typology REL2311
WFD water body name Texasbekken oppstrøms Texasdalen
Pre-project morphology Closed culvert
Reference morphology Naturally straight
Desired post project morphology Naturally straight
Heavily modified water body No
National/international site designation Norway - Naturreservat
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present No
Invasive species present Yes
Species of interest Canadian pondweed (Elodea canadensis )
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) 150150 m <br />0.15 km <br />15,000 cm <br />
Project started 2015/04/06
Works started 2016/04/12
Works completed 2016/11/16
Project completed 2020/02/10
Total cost category 10 - 50 k€
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio 5
Funding sources Norwegian Environment Agency (Miljødirektoratet)

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design 1 - 10 k€ Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) Berit Köhler
Stakeholder engagement and communication Less than 1 k€ Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA) Ingrid Nesheim
Works and works supervision
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure Urbanisation
Hydromorphology Freshwater flow regime
Biology Fish, Invertebrates
Physico-chemical Nutrient concentrations
Other reasons for the project Recreation


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
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
Nutrient concentrations Yes Yes No Yes Yes No change
PH No Yes No Yes No Inconclusive

Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative
Increased recreation No Yes No Yes No Improvement


Monitoring documents



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description
http://https://www.niva.no/rapporter/overvaking-i-referanseelver Home page for the restoration project

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information