Case study:Tutta Beck

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


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


Location: 54° 30' 55.77" N, 1° 52' 17.61" 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 In progress
Project web site http://www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/18_tuttabeck.pdf
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology
Country England
Main contact forename Ben
Main contact surname Lamb
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Tees Rivers Trust
Contact organisation web site http://teesriverstrust.org/
Partner organisations Rokeby Estate, Landowners and farmers, Durham University, Durham County Council
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.


Three properties in the village of Greta Bridge, south of Barnard Castle on Teesside (Map 1), are subject to flooding from Tutta Beck (Photo 1), a tributary of the River Greta which is itself a tributary of the River Tees. The last flood in 2012 resulted in allocation of Local Levy funding and design for a 'hard measure' to be installed. However, the village is in a building conservation area and has significant archaeological heritage, and the proposed flood fence was not supported by local residents. The Tees Rivers Trust identified a Heritage Lottery funding opportunity to support a MSc research project at Durham University to model Natural Flood Management (NFM) measures in the catchment. This has now been completed and a business case to put NFM measures in place is being made by Durham County Council. Work to install measures is expected to begin in spring 2017.

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 Tutta Beck
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
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 2016
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€) £75,000"£" is not declared as a valid unit of measurement for this property.
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF), Teeside Landscape Partnership, Local levy funding

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


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern leaky woody dams
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

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