Upload
susanna-ellis
View
227
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
URBAN STREAM URBAN STREAM REHABILITATIONREHABILITATION
CASE STUDIESCASE STUDIES
Contents:Contents:11 Approach Approach
22 Case studiesCase studies
33 Impacts of urban river rehabilitationsImpacts of urban river rehabilitations
44 Planning and implementation process Planning and implementation process
55 Aesthetic evaluation methods Aesthetic evaluation methods
66 Social appraisal and participationSocial appraisal and participation
77 Rehabilitation techniquesRehabilitation techniques
88 Summary and conclusionsSummary and conclusions
1 ApproachApproach
• Survey on urban rehabilitation schemes (Europe, others)Survey on urban rehabilitation schemes (Europe, others)
• Case study approachCase study approach
- urban setting- urban setting
- rehabilitation (ecological improvement) - rehabilitation (ecological improvement)
- scheme completed - scheme completed
• Standardised enquiry formStandardised enquiry form
• Quantitative and qualitative analysis of each Quantitative and qualitative analysis of each casecase
• Comparison of tools, techniques, procedures Comparison of tools, techniques, procedures and impactsand impacts
AA
high good mod. poor bad high good mod. poor bad
I Ecological State1 Biological State
a) phytoplankton b) macrophytes and phytobenthosc) benthic invertebrate faunad) fish fauna
2 Hydro-morphologya) hydrological regimeb) river continuityc) morphological conditions
Ecological and Chemical State
State of water body (according Water Framework Directive ) before and after implementation
evaluation scaleparameter
state of water body before revitalization (reference date: ………...)
state of water body after revitalization (reference date: ………...)
Urban River Basin Enhancement Methods (URBEM) Case Studies of Existing Successful River Enhancement Projects(A) Ecological and Chemical State
1. Approach
1 Selected case studies
2 Comparison of General Characteristics
2. Case studies -Brief description
Austria:
Vienna - Wienfluss
2. Case studies -Brief description
Germany:
Munich – Isar
2. Case studies -Brief description
Italy:
Florence – Mugnone Brook
2. Case studies -Brief description
Switzerland:
Zurich – Brook Concept
Albisrieder Dorfbach2. Case studies -Brief description
Czech Republic:
Chrudim – Náhon
2. Case studies -Brief description
2. Case studies -Brief description
Cananda:
Toronto – Mud Creek
2. Case studies -Brief description
United States:
Wilmington – Christina River
2. Case studies -Brief description
1 Objectives of urban river 1 Objectives of urban river rehabilitationrehabilitation
2 Objectives of ecological 2 Objectives of ecological improvementimprovement
3 Length of urban river rehabilitation 3 Length of urban river rehabilitation schemesschemes
4 Total costs of urban river rehabilitation 4 Total costs of urban river rehabilitation schemesschemes
2 Case studies -Case studies - CharacterisationCharacterisation
2. Case studies -Characterisation
Objectives of ecological improvementin urban rehabilitation projects
8 (36%)
7 (32%)
11 (50%)
5 (23%)
5 (23%)
6 (27%)
2 (9%)
3 (14%)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
other parameters
vegetation
target species
lateral connectivity
continuum
stream morphology
hydrlology / hydaulics
w ater quality
nam
ed o
bje
ctiv
es o
f ec
olo
gca
l en
han
cem
ent
number of namings (n=22)
2. Case studies -Characterisation
Objectives of urban river rehabilitation projects
9 (39%)
22 (96%)
6 (26%)
10 (43%)
10 (43%)
8 (35%)
5 (22%)
8 (35%)
0 5 10 15 20
others
education
Public involvement
urban upgrading
amenity/recreation
visual improvement
ecological improvement
f lood control
nam
ed
ob
jecti
ves o
f u
rban
riv
er
reh
ab
ilit
ati
on
pro
jects
number of namings (n=23)
2. Case studies -Characterisation
Total costs of rehabilitation projects and costs per meter
3,244
12,040
1,5150,500 0,576 0,007 0,310 0,005
0,800
5,100
0,190 0,135 0,027
18,100
0,6041,275
2,524
0,300
12,000
4,400
0,952
27,00026,0002.907
4.393
1.782
333230 245
3.375
3.100
2.737
10
200
1.457
169
6368
2.9573.385
585
1.000
2.1032.014
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
case studiy
tota
l cos
ts o
f reh
abili
tatio
n pr
ojec
t (M
io €
)
1
10
100
1.000
10.000
proj
ect c
osts
per
met
er (€
)la
nd p
urch
ase
cost
s (T
EU)
total costs
costs per meter
land purchase costs
12.06715.000
1.000 TEU 1.000 TEU
500 TEU
5.600 TEU
2. Case studies -Characterisation
Length of rehabilitated river sections and size of area
1.116
2.741
850
1.500
30 100
500
4.000
3.500
3.000
800
400
1.500
300
2.180
1.200
300
800
1.300
322
2.500
370
500
400
250
113024866
40 80,02
100 136
0
1.000
2.000
3.000
4.000
5.000
6.000
case study
leng
th o
f reh
abili
tate
d se
ctio
n (m
)
-400
500
size
of a
ffect
ed a
rea
(100
0m2)
length of section
size of rehabilitated area
9,5 km 8,0 km550
660
520
0
area size: if not mentioned = no data
2. Case studies -Characterisation
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation 3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes schemes
• Ecological impactsEcological impacts
• Social impactsSocial impacts
• Economic impactsEconomic impacts
• Impacts on public health and safetyImpacts on public health and safety
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
Hydro-morphologic conditions of urban waters before and after rehabilitation
case study
stat
e cl
ass
of w
ater
bo
dy (W
FD)
hydrological regime
river continuity
morphological conditions
very good
good
moderate
poor
bad
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
Biological conditions of urban waters before and after rehabilitation
case study
stat
e cl
ass
of
wat
er
bo
dy
(WF
D)
macrophytes and phytobenthos
benthic invertebrate fauna
fish fauna
very good
good
moderate
poor
bad
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
Overall acceptance of urban river rehabilitation sites before and after rehablitation
case study
esti
mat
ion
of
con
dit
ion
Frequency by local population
Frequency by tourists
Frequency by school classes
above average
average
below average
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
Impact of urban river rehabilitation schemeson fish fauna
0
00
1 (6%)
5 (31%)
10 (63%)
8 (50%)
2 (13%)
1 (6%)
5 (31%)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
bad
poor
moderate
good
very good
sta
te c
las
s a
cc
ord
ing
WF
D
number of case studies
after rehabilitation (n=16)
before rehabilitation (n=16)
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
Visual and spatial experience along urban river rehabilitationsections before and after rehabilitation
case study
estim
atio
n of
con
diti
on
presence of focal pointspresence of view ing pointsdistinctive open spacesvisual aversion experiences
above average
average
below average
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
Morphological conditions and biological indicators of urban waters before and ofter rehabilitation
case study
stat
e cl
ass
of w
ater
bod
y (W
FD)
morphological conditionsbenthic invertebrate faunafish fauna
very good
good
moderate
poor
bad
3. Impacts of river rehabilitation schemes
• Initiation of urban river rehabilitation projectsInitiation of urban river rehabilitation projects
• Site selectionSite selection
• Project managementProject management
4. Planning and 4. Planning and implementation processimplementation process
• Almost 90 % public administration initiationsAlmost 90 % public administration initiations
• primary initiative usually from citizen groupsprimary initiative usually from citizen groups
• 20 % responding to legal demands20 % responding to legal demands
• Most aim at rehabilitation of certain river sectionMost aim at rehabilitation of certain river section
• Selection methods on basin or city scale, determination of Selection methods on basin or city scale, determination of potential for rehabilitationpotential for rehabilitation
• 21% used some kind of site selection method 21% used some kind of site selection method
4. Planning and implementation 4. Planning and implementation processprocess
19751980198519901995200020052010
case study
year
initiation idea funding process planning process
implementation post-implementation appraisal
4. Planning and implementation 4. Planning and implementation processprocess
Initiators of urban river rehabilitation projects
1 (4%)
6 (26%)
9 (39%)
20 (87%)
0 4 8 12 16 20
Other initiatives
Interest group initiative
Civic initiative
Public administration initiative
number of namings(% of case studies, n=23)
4. Planning and implementation 4. Planning and implementation processprocess
5. 5. Aesthetic EvaluationAesthetic Evaluation
Aspects of Aesthetic Perception and Aspects of Aesthetic Perception and Recreational UsabilityRecreational Usability
• extracted from Part B and Part C of the extracted from Part B and Part C of the enquiry, state conditions and enquiry, state conditions and implemented measuresimplemented measures
• quite diverse understanding of what quite diverse understanding of what aesthetics for urban rivers isaesthetics for urban rivers is
5. 5. Aesthetic Aesthetic Evaluation Evaluation
74.00%
35.00%
30.00%
78.00%
70.00%
35.00%
13.00%
22.00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Visual and Spatial Aspects
Aspects of Smell and Sound
Remedy of Aversion Experience
Aspects of Accessibility
Aspects of Social and Cultural Infrastructure
Aspects of Accident Prevention
Aspects of Public Health
Aesthetical Evaluation methods
5. 5. Aesthetic Aesthetic Evaluation Evaluation
Aspects of Aesthetic Perception Aspects of Aesthetic Perception and Recreational Experienceand Recreational Experience
Aesthetic Evaluation MethodsAesthetic Evaluation Methods• expert assessmentsexpert assessments• surveyssurveys
5. 5. Aesthetic Aesthetic Evaluation Evaluation
5. 5. Aesthetic EvaluationAesthetic Evaluation
74.00%
35.00%
30.00%
78.00%
70.00%
35.00%
13.00%
22.00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Visual and Spatial Aspects
Aspects of Smell and Sound
Remedy of Aversion Experience
Aspects of Accessibility
Aspects of Social and Cultural Infrastructure
Aspects of Accident Prevention
Aspects of Public Health
Aesthetical Evaluation methods
5. 5. Aesthetic Aesthetic Evaluation Evaluation
6.Social appraisal and 6.Social appraisal and Public Public
Involvement Involvement • Legal requirements for public Legal requirements for public
participationparticipation
• Stakeholders and Identification of Stakeholders and Identification of StakeholdersStakeholders
• Informing stakeholders Informing stakeholders
• Involving Stakeholders Involving Stakeholders
• Stewardshop and AdvocacyStewardshop and Advocacy
6.Social appraisal and Public 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement Involvement
• legal requirements for public information legal requirements for public information and involvement have been mentioned for and involvement have been mentioned for almost half of the projecsalmost half of the projecs
• how did project responsibles deal with this how did project responsibles deal with this legislation?legislation?
• involvement from public information to involvement from public information to comprehensive participation of diverse comprehensive participation of diverse stakeholder groupsstakeholder groups
6.Social appraisal and Public 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement Involvement
48.00%
61.00%
87.00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Legal Requirements for Public Participation Legal Requirements for Public Participation
ExceededProjects w ith any Kind of Public Participation
c
6.Social appraisal and Public 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement Involvement
• citzen: residents, property ownerscitzen: residents, property owners
• NGOs on national, regional and local NGOs on national, regional and local levellevel
• commercial assosiations (Anacostia commercial assosiations (Anacostia River Business Coalition)River Business Coalition)
• Politicians (Isar)Politicians (Isar)• Identification of stakeholders Identification of stakeholders (Kaitzbach(Kaitzbach, , SkerneSkerne))
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement - 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement - Stakeholders Stakeholders
87. 00%
17. 00%
65. 00%
26. 00%
43. 00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Citizen
Political Groups
NGO's (Non-Government Organisations)
Commercial Associations or Single Businesses
other Social Groups
c
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement - 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement - Stakeholders Stakeholders
• increase of social awareness and increase of social awareness and appraisalappraisal
• first step to public participationfirst step to public participation• Guided toursGuided tours• Information boards onsite Information boards onsite • Exhibitions Exhibitions • InstallationsInstallations
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Informing 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Informing Stakeholders Stakeholders
96. 00%
57. 00%
43. 00%
52. 00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Paper Related (Brochures, Billboards,New spaper/Journals)
World Wide Web
Local TV-Station/Radio
Presentations, Lectures etc.
c
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Informing 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Informing Stakeholders Stakeholders
• Collection of ideas and site selection Collection of ideas and site selection
• competitionscompetitions• surveys surveys • workshops workshops • public discussion meetingspublic discussion meetings
• on site involvement (Wandse, Toronto)on site involvement (Wandse, Toronto)
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Involving 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Involving Stakeholders Stakeholders
57. 00%
65. 00%
35. 00%
35. 00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
In Course of Different Project Phases
Collection of Ideas
Site Selection
Voluntary Clean-up Events
c
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Involving 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement – Involving Stakeholders Stakeholders
• active support for river enhancement active support for river enhancement through stakeholdersthrough stakeholders
• Partnerships: brook sponsorships, Partnerships: brook sponsorships, NGOs, coalitionsNGOs, coalitions
• continuous activities: newsletter, continuous activities: newsletter, guided tours, school days, monitoringguided tours, school days, monitoring
• single events: inauguration of single events: inauguration of schemes, river related festivals schemes, river related festivals
• information for rivers non-project information for rivers non-project relatedrelated
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement Stewardship and Stewardship and advocacyadvocacy
30. 00%
52. 00%
52. 00%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Partnerships and Coalitions for River Stew ardship
River Advocacy through Continuous Activities
River Advocacy through Single Events
c
6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement 6.Social appraisal and Public Involvement Stewardship and Stewardship and advocacyadvocacy
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniquesRehabilitation techniques
• Improving Water QualityImproving Water Quality
• Improving Hydrology and Improving Hydrology and HydrodynamicsHydrodynamics
• Improving Stream ConnectivityImproving Stream Connectivity
• Restoration Techniques for Aquatic Restoration Techniques for Aquatic and Riverine Ecosystemsand Riverine Ecosystems
• Techniques Incorporating Features to Techniques Incorporating Features to Improve Public Health and SafetyImprove Public Health and Safety
• Measures Practiced Basin WideMeasures Practiced Basin Wide
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniquesRehabilitation techniques
35%
13%
37%
48%
44%
55%
48%
52%
87%
22%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Measures to Reduce Point Sources of Pollution
Measures to Reduce Non-Point Sources of Pollution
Ameliorationg Stream Hydrology
Measures to Control the Sediment Balance
Channel Reconstruction by Improving LongitudinalConnectivity
Channel Stabilisation and Enhancing LateralConnectivity
Re-establishing Vertical Connectivity
Restoration of Aquatic Vegetation
Restoration of Riparian Vegetation
Restoration of Aquatic Populations and Fisheries
Groups of individual measures can be found aiming at the Groups of individual measures can be found aiming at the same rehabilitation target same rehabilitation target
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – measure Rehabilitation techniques – measure groupsgroups
Measures: Measures:
wet ponds with extended detentionwet ponds with extended detentiongrassy filter strips grassy filter strips constructed wetlandsconstructed wetlands bioretentionbioretention structural enhancement structural enhancement silt trapping devicessilt trapping devices
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – water Rehabilitation techniques – water qualityquality
22%
52%
30%
17%
9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Construction of biological treatment plants
Stormw ater storage and treatment
Sew er separation
Sediment control (erosion prevention)
Control of chemical pollutants
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – water Rehabilitation techniques – water qualityquality
• one fourth of case studies used one fourth of case studies used stormwater infiltration for detaining stormwater infiltration for detaining peak flowpeak flow
• measures ‘managing discharge from measures ‘managing discharge from detention basins in accordance to detention basins in accordance to natural runoff’, or ‘water management in natural runoff’, or ‘water management in collaboration with power plant’ to collaboration with power plant’ to ‘master-planning advices for the ‘master-planning advices for the catchment area’catchment area’
sediment balance: sediment balance: • sediment traps, such as sediment sediment traps, such as sediment
ponds, ponds, • check dams for sediment control check dams for sediment control • the management of construction the management of construction
sites (temporary runoff diversions sites (temporary runoff diversions and chutes)and chutes)
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – Hydrology and Rehabilitation techniques – Hydrology and HydrodynamicsHydrodynamics
48%
26%
48%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Managing w ater w ithdraw el & adapting thedischarge regime to a less disturbed situation
Enhancement of base f low through stormw aterinfiltration
Measures to establish a less disturbed sedimentbalance
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – Hydrology and Rehabilitation techniques – Hydrology and HydrodynamicsHydrodynamics
Longitudinal m.:Longitudinal m.:
• Alignment and meanderingAlignment and meandering
• Biological continuityBiological continuity
Techniques for longitudinal, vertical and lateral Techniques for longitudinal, vertical and lateral connectivity 1connectivity 1
MeasuresMeasures::• drops were removed, drops were removed, ground ground
rampsramps, , fish ladders, fish ladders, daylightingdaylighting
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – Improving ConnectivityRehabilitation techniques – Improving Connectivity
57%
43%
22%
70%
43%
30%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Removal & bypassing of structural f low and migrationbarriers (dams, w eirs, steps)
Bypassing ecologically poor river sections
Construction/ modif ications of damming and/orretaining structures
Restoration of the river gradient
Restoration of stream alignment (according channeltype)
Day lighting of streams
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – Improving ConnectivityRehabilitation techniques – Improving Connectivity
• pool and riffle zones were madepool and riffle zones were made
• Gravel beds and current deflectors Gravel beds and current deflectors have been successfully re-have been successfully re-introduced introduced
Vertical Vertical m.:m.:
• BedformBedformss
Techniques for longitudinal, vertical and lateral Techniques for longitudinal, vertical and lateral connectivity 3connectivity 3
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – Improving ConnectivityRehabilitation techniques – Improving Connectivity
48%
48%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Inf ill or/and cleaning of river bed sediments Removal of hard bed lining re-establishing the
connection to ground w ater body
7. 7. Rehabilitation techniques – Improving ConnectivityRehabilitation techniques – Improving Connectivity
8. Summary8. Summary• Most projects occur on streams and Most projects occur on streams and
small riverssmall rivers
• Low number of completed urban Low number of completed urban rehabilitation schemes rehabilitation schemes
• Ecological aspects play an increasing Ecological aspects play an increasing role role
• Social aspectsSocial aspects
• Wide variety of soft techniquesWide variety of soft techniques
• Scarce use of evaluation methodsScarce use of evaluation methods
• Schemes need systematic Schemes need systematic performance controlperformance control
8. Summary8. Summary
1. Case studies1. Case studies
More info…More info…
For more information follow this linkFor more information follow this link
Speicher