1. General information
Location and description of the intervention
City or FUA
Coventry
Region
Europe
Native title of the NBS intervention
River Restoration on the Guphill Brook
Short description of the intervention
Warwickshire Wildlife Trust has completed an urban river restoration on the Guphill Brook that aims to restore the brook's natural features and enhance the surrounding habitat. "The project [is expected to] bring multiple benefits to diminishing wildlife and deprived local communities but also importantly to flood risk reduction, which is becoming ever more important with the increased negative effects of climate change." (Ref. 1)
Address

Coventry
United Kingdom

Area boundary
POINT (-1.555292 52.4125)
POINT (-1.555292 52.412205)
POINT (-1.563611 52.410327)
POINT (-1.564261 52.411191)
POINT (-1.557223 52.412487)
NBS area image
Source of NBS area image
Ref. 2. Warwickshire Avon Catchment Partnership. Presentation.
Type of area before implementation of the NBS
Please specify “other type of area” before implementation of the NBS
Urban river/ associated floodplain (Ref. 1, 2)
Timeline of intervention
Start date of the intervention (planning process)
2015
Start date of intervention (implementation process)
2016
End date of the intervention
2016
Present stage of the intervention
Please specify "other" stage of the intervention
Works completed in 2016. (Ref. 2)
The project is part of the ‘Catchment Based Approach’ partnership, where the purpose is to deliver enhancement projects in the 3 Priority Areas, amongst them being Coventry Brooks (including Guphill Brook). (Ref. 2)
Project is “developed to address several issues causing WFD [Water Framework Directive] failure of Guphill Brook” (e.g. urban and agricultural diffuse pollution, poor biological and ecological quality, poor hydro geo-morphological quality. (Ref. 2)
Goals of the intervention
“The project’s aim is to restore the brook’s natural features and enhance the surrounding habitat.” (Ref. 1) It is part of a larger effort to improve water quality to meet the objectives of the Water Framework Directive (Ref. 3).
The River Restoration on Guphill Brook's project goals include:
“1. Enhance the Guphill Brook and associated floodplain through restoring the natural geomorphological features. 2. Create onsite backwaters and associated wetland features. 3. Form a series of new wetlands to filter water flowing into and through the Guphill Brook, improving water quality. 4. Widen buffer strips, create wildflower habitat. 5. Increase the shading of part of the watercourse to reduce water temperatures. 6. Provide habitat to facilitate a water vole recolonisation or potential re-introduction.” (Ref. 2)
Quantitative targets
Unknown
Monitoring indicators defined
urban and agricultural diffuse pollution, biological and ecological quality, hydro geo-morphological quality (Ref. 2)
Climate change adaptation: What were the goals of the NBS?
Habitats and biodiversity conservation: What types of conservation goals are / were defined for the NBS intervention?
What types of restoration goals are / were defined for the NBS intervention?
Implementation activities
“Re- profiled banks of the brook to restore a more natural flow; Increased area of fish spawning gravels and in-stream vegetation; 2 backwater areas totalling 100m²; Enhance 280m² buffer strip grassland.” (Ref. 2)
“remove areas of Himalayan balsam and to create valuable wildflower-rich meadows alongside the river. These will be sown and planted by local volunteers and will provide not only a source of food for water voles and invertebrates such as bees and butterflies but will act as a natural highway helping wildlife move between isolated habitats.” (Ref. 1)
“Creation of pools connected to the river will give fish and invertebrates a place to rest and shelter but also importantly, have been designed to provide refuge and food for our most charming but sadly also most declined water dweller, the water vole.” (Ref. 1)
Increase shading of part of watercourse to reduce water temperatures. (ref 2)
NBS domain and interventions
Ecological domain(s) where the NBS intervention(s) is/are implemented
Blue infrastructure
Rivers/streams/canals/estuaries
In-land wetlands, peatlands, swamps, and moors
Green areas for water management
Swales and filter strips
Grey infrastructure featuring greens
Riverbank/Lakeside greens
What is the level of innovation / development of the NBS related to water management?
Vegetation Type
Amenities offered by the NBS
Services
Expected ecosystem services delivered
Provisioning services
Water (surface and ground water for drinking and non-drinking purposes)
Genetic materials from all biota
Regulating services
Flood regulation
Water purification / filtration
Pollination
Other
Habitat and supporting services
Habitats for species
Maintenance of genetic diversity
Pest and disease control
Cultural services
Recreation
Please specify "other regulating service"
Increase shading of part of watercourse to reduce water temperatures. (Ref 2)
Scale
Spatial scale
Meso-scale: Regional, metropolitan and urban level
Micro-scale: District/neighbourhood level
Sub-microscale: Street scale (including buildings)
Beneficiaries
Please specify "other primary beneficiary"
fish and invertebrates such as bees and butterflies; the "most declined water dweller, the water vole.” (Ref. 1)
Governance
Non-government actors
Other
Please specify other non-government actors involved
Charity/ Trust (Ref. 1)
Please specify the roles of the specific government and non-government actor groups involved in the initiative
Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is undertaking the urban river restoration in partnership with the Environment Agency, Coventry City Council and The Naturesave Trust (The Naturesave Trust was established as the charitable arm of Naturesave Insurance.). (Ref. 1)
Local Volunteers to assist with wildflower seeding, planting, and community engagement (Ref. 2)
Consulting/ Advisory (wetland specialist consultants, Middlemarch Environmental, Wild Trout Trust) (Ref. 2)
Sherbourne Partnership (Ref. 2)
Funding from Catchment Partnership Fund (from Environment Agency) (Ref. 2,7)
“Community engagement: include: Presentation to local residents association; Letters to all local residents; queries answered; Posters on site 10 days before start of work; Sherbourne Partnership and local volunteers to assist with wildflower seeding, planting and community engagement, support from Coventry City Council.” (Ref. 2)
Key actors - initiating organization
Please specify other key actors – Initiating organization
Warwickshire Wildlife Trust (Ref 1)
Land owners
Key actors - Other stakeholders involved (besides initiating actors)
National government
Local government/municipality
Non-government organisation/civil society
Citizens or community group
Private sector/corporate actor/company
Private foundation/trust
Land owners
Policy drivers
NBS intervention implemented in response to an Regional Directive/Strategy
Yes
Please specify the "Regional Directive/Strategy"
The Water Framework Directive (Ref. 2, 3)
NBS intervention implemented in response to a national regulations/strategy/plan
Yes
Please specify the national regulations/strategy/plan
‘The UK Biodiversity Action Plan’ (with regard to the measures concerning the Water Vole). (Ref. 4)
NBS intervention implemented in response to a local regulation/strategy/plan
Unknown
Mandatory or voluntary intervention
Mandatory (based on policy)
Intervention is mandatory
Enablers
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS vision/strategy/plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
Action for Wildlife in 'Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Local Biodiversity Action Plan' which includes the Water Vole. (Ref. 5)
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS section/part in a more general plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify the general plan with GI/NBS section
The water vole is mentioned in connection to the Coventry Green Belt (Ref. 6)
If there is a relevant strategy or plan, please specify the theme / type of the plan.
Please specify other vegetation type
"ppols","river" (Ref. 1)
"2 back water areas totalling 100 m^2" (Ref. 2)
"fish spawning gravels and in stream vegetation" (Ref. 2)
"remove[d] areas of Himalayan balsam and "wildflower rich meadows" (Ref. 1)
"enhance 280 m^2 buffer strip grassland" (Ref. 2)
"a mosaic wetland" (Ref. 2)
Presence of city network or regional partnerships focused on NBS - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
Sherbourne Partnership (Ref. 2)
Local Biodiversity Action Partnership (Warwickshire, Coventry & Solihull Local Biodiversity Action Plan) (regarding e.g the Water Vole). (Ref. 5)
Presence of GI / NBS research project - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
'Feasibility Study and Initial Design Report' by wetland specialist consultants, funded by Warwickshire Wildlife Trust. (Ref. 2)
Subsidies/investment for GI / NBS in the city - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
E.g. "In-kind value of: £1,250 Coventry City Council staff time input 5 days". (Ref 2)
Co-finance for NBS
Yes
Co-financing governance arrangements
Unknown
Was this co-governance arrangement already in place, or was it set up specifically for this NBS?
Financing
What is/was the Cost/Budget (EUR) of the NBS or green infrastructure elements?
43 000 (Ref 2)
What are the total amount of expected annual maintenance costs?
Unknown
What is the expected annual maintenance costs of the NBS or GI elements?
Unknown
Please specify cost savings
Unknown
Please specify total cost (EUR)
Total project value: £38,300 [around 43 000 EUR]. (Ref. 2)
(Including: Total funding from CPAF (Catchment Partnership Action Fund): £24,500. (Ref. 2)
In-kind value of: £1,250 Coventry City Council staff time input 5 days; £5,900 volunteer hour input; £600 Staff time input additional discussions with Middlemarch Environmental 2 days; £1,500 Management time input 5 days. (Ref. 2)
Match funding: £4,550 'Feasibility Study' by wetland specialist consultants, funded by Warwickshire Wildlife Trust.) (Ref. 2)
Please specify other type of fund used
In-kind value of: £1,250 Coventry City Council staff time input 5 days; £5,900 volunteer hour input; £600 Staff time input additional discussions with Middlemarch Environmental 2 days; £1,500 Management time input 5 days. Match funding: £4,550 'Feasibility Study and Initial Design Report' by wetland specialist consultants, funded by Warwickshire Wildlife Trust (Ref. 2)
Non-financial contribution
Yes
Type of non-financial contribution
Please specify other Business model
Habitat Restoration (Ref. 2)
Business models
Which of the involved actors was motivated by this model?
Please specify technological innovation
The project’s aim is to restore the brook’s natural features through e.g. creation of pools connected to the river. (Ref. 1)
Please specify social innovation
The project will bring multiple benefits to e.g. deprived local communities. (Ref. 1)
Please specify novelty level of the innovation
Coventry Water Vole Project. (Ref. 5)
Please specify Replicability/Transferability
Future projects: 'Woody debris' (a proposal from Wild Trout Trust, to enhance fish habitat and examples include: Lakeview Park, River Sherbourne riverine restoration, Charterhouse, Riverine enhancement. (Ref. 2)
Impacts, benefits
Description of environmental benefits
Achieved Impacts:
"Increase shading of part of watercourse to reduce water temperatures" (Ref. 2)
“1.Enhance the Guphill Brook and associated floodplain through restoring the natural geomorphological features. 2. Create backwaters and associated wetland features. 3. Form a series of new wetlands to filter water flowing into and through the Guphill Brook, improving water quality. 4. Widen buffer strips, create wildflower habitat. 5. Increase the shading of part of the watercourse to reduce water temperatures. 6. Provide habitat to facilitate a water vole recolonisation or potential re-introduction.” (Ref. 2)
“Re- profiled banks of the brook to restore a more natural flow; Increased area of fish spawning gravels and in-stream vegetation; 2 back water areas totalling 100m²; Enhance 280m² buffer strip grassland.” (Ref. 2)
"create valuable wildflower-rich meadows alongside the river... provid[ing] not only a source of food for water voles and invertebrates such as bees and butterflies but [also acting] as a natural highway helping wildlife move between isolated habitats. " (Ref. 1)
“Creation of pools connected to the river will give fish and invertebrates a place to rest and shelter but also importantly, have been designed to provide refuge and food for our most charming but sadly also most declined water dweller, the water vole.” (Ref. 1)
removed areas of Himalayan balsam and to create valuable wildflower-rich meadows alongside the river. (Ref. 1)
Economic impacts
Description of economic benefits
Unknown
Please specify other environmental justice issue
increased habitat for threatened species: “Creation of pools connected to the river will give fish and invertebrates a place to rest and shelter but also importantly, have been designed to provide refuge and food for our most charming but sadly also most declined water dweller, the water vole.” (Ref. 1)
habitat restoration for species: “Re- profiled banks of brook to restore a more natural flow; Increased area of fish spawning gravels and in stream vegetation; 2 back water areas totalling 100m²; Enhance 280m² buffer strip grassland.” (Ref. 2)
"create valuable wildflower rich meadows alongside the river... provid[ing] not only a source of food for water voles and invertebrates such as bees and butterflies but [also acting] as a natural highway helping wildlife move between isolated habitats. " (Ref. 1)
Description of social and cultural benefits
Expected Impacts:
"Enhancements will encourage local people to spend more time outdoors" (Ref. 2)
"The wetland habitat will provide a quality resource for local schools: 8 within 1km" (Ref. 2)
"Opportunities for volunteer groups to be actively care for their area and build life-long connections with nature" (Ref. 2)
Type of reported impacts
Indicators
Flow of water; Water temperature; Area of fish spawning gravels; Added stream vegetation; Added back water areas; Area of buffer strip grassland enhanced; Wetlands created; Wildflower habitats created; Number of water voles (Ref. 2)

Locals/Volunteers participating in the project. (Ref. 1, 2)

- 5 fixed point photographs
- Kick samples at backwater creation sites
- Water vole survey
- Botanical species survey
(Ref. 2)
Analysis of specific impact categories
Job creation: The NBS created ...
Environmental justice: The implementation of the NBS project resulted in ...
Please specify other method used to evaluate the impacts of NBS
- 5 fixed point photographs
- Kick samples at backwater creation sites
- Water vole survey
- Botanical species survey
(Ref. 2)
Negative impacts: Did the project cause any problems or concerns?
No information was found regarding negative impacts of the project
COVID-19 pandemic
Unknown as of 27 August 2020
Methods of impact monitoring
Evidence for use of assessment
Presence of an assessment, evaluation and/or monitoring process
Yes
Presence of indicators used in reporting
Yes
Presence of monitoring/evaluation reports
Yes
Availability of a web-based monitoring tool
No
Impact assessment mechanism
Name of any specific impact assessment tools
“Walkover surveys undertaken along all accessible stretches of brooks in Coventry (Nov 2012 – Feb 2013); Annotated maps and Proposed solutions per brook; Photographs of all structures and issues; Priority map of the brooks, with areas of most concern.” (Ref. 2)

A Habitat Assessment is included in Ref. 3. Also, follow up recommendations were made by The Wild Trout Trust, following their e.g. habitat assessment. (Ref. 3)

Also, the Guphill Brook falls within the waterbody Sherbourne and assessments by the Environment Agency were carried out in 2009 and 2014, rating the waterbody as ‘poor’; the elements which contribute to this poor rating are biological (invertebrates and fish, although the latter were “good” in 2014), with water quality parameters being moderate or good. “It is unlikelythe Guphill Brook has been surveyed specifically within this larger waterbody, so the above information must be treated as general guidance.” (Ref. 3)
Use of GIS in mapping impacts
No evidence in public records
Citizen involvement
Citizens involvement in assessment/evaluation
Yes
Mode(s) of citizen involvement in evaluation/assessment
Please specify other modes of citizen involvement in evaluation/assessment
“Community engagement: include: Presentation to local residents association; Letters to all local residents; queries answered; Posters on site 10 days before start of work; Sherbourne Partnership and local volunteers to assist with wildflower seeding, planting and community engagement, support from Coventry City Council.” (Ref. 2)
Citizens involvement in the analysis of the assessment/evaluation
Unknown
Follow-up to the evaluation / assessment
Unknown
References
Documents relevant to the intervention
Attachment Size
Ref. 2 (6.5 MB) 6.5 MB
Ref. 3 (4.11 MB) 4.11 MB
Ref. 6 (5.72 MB) 5.72 MB
Ref. 7 (857.33 KB) 857.33 KB
List of references
Ref. 1. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust (n.d.) River Restoration on the Guphill Brook. [Not available in 2020].
Ref. 2. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust (2016) Warwickshire Avon Catchment Partnership. Rowe, G. Precious, T. Living landscape, WWT. [Document provided].
Ref. 3. The Wild Trout Trust (2015) Guphill (or Brookstray) Brook, Allesley, Coventry. Advisory Visit. [Document provided].
Ref. 4. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust (n.d.) Coventry Water Vole Project. [Not available in 2020].
Ref. 5. Warwickshire GOV (2012) Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Local Biodiversity Action Plan. Action for Wildlife. Water Vole. [Not available in 2020].
Ref. 6. Coventry City Council (2014) Coventry Green Belt Review 2014 Ecological Review. Habitat Biodiversity Audit. [Document provided].
Ref. 7. Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. (2016). Catchment Partnerships Action Fund: Environment Agency Report 2015-16. [Document provided].
Comments and notes
Comments
2020 comment:
Most of the original project links are no longer available in 2020.
Public Images
Image
Guphill Brook 1
Source: Ref. 2
Image
Guphill Brook 2
Source: Ref. 2
Image
Guphill Brook 3
Source: Ref. 2
Image
Guphill Brook 4
Source: Ref. 2
Image
Guphill Brook 5
Source: Ref. 2
Image
Guphill Brook 6
Source: Ref. 2
Please specify other source of non-financial contribution
"£1,250 Coventry City Council staff time input 5 days; £5,900 volunteer hour input; £600 Staff time input additional discussions with Middlemarch Environmental 2 days; £1,500 Management time input 5 days" (Ref. 2)