General National Id Estonia_03 Site name Lepiku channel Summary Reconstruction of the Lepiku channel that is a part of the drainage system, which starts from the new residential area next to the Tallinn Botanic Garden and includes wetlands, detention ponds, ditches and channels and debouches into Pirita river. The aim was to improve the quality of the storm water that flows into the Pirita river. The river Pirita is a part of Natura 2000 site and flows into the Baltic Sea. The length of the reconstructed channel part is ca 195 m and the works included: widening of channel bottom in different segments, creating artificial dykes and rapids and creating suitable conditions to the aquatic plants exhibits in Botanic Garden. Light or indepth? Light NUTS Code Eesti RBD code EE1 Transboundary 0 NWRM(s) implemented in the case study Channels and rills Longitude 24.8764 Latitude 59.4822 Site information Climate zone cool temperate moist Mean rainfall 450 Mean rainfall unit mm/year Type Actual Test Site Vegetation class Botanic garden area where near the channel are different plants Monitoring maintenance Monitoring parameters Monitored will be in future water quality (N, P etc) Performance Performance impact estimation method Catchment outlet Design & implementations Application scale Plot Installation date 2015 Performance timescale 1 - 4 years Area (ha) 150.4 Size 195 Size unit m Favourable preconditions The aim for Tallinn Botancal Garden was reorganisation of the channel section. And not just cleaning the channel and ensuring banks but while doing it to keep in mind water purification, water regime regulation and aesthetic appearance. Aim was to design a modern, eco-friendly and not very costly solution, which would set a good example for the other channels and trenches in Tallinn. Maybe to change the the way of thinking to solve the problem through hiding water into the pipe underground instead bringing it visuable in the channel on the ground Design contractual arrangement Arrangement type Responsibility Role Comments Name Design consultation activity Activity stage Key issues Name Comments Design land use change Land use change type Design authority Authority type Role Responsibility Name Comments Other Initiation of the measure 1. Tallinn Environment Department Tallinn city Environment department Other 2. Tallinn University Carried out a survey in coastal parishes (in Baltic countries) with the aim to find out the attitude of people towards environmental protection measures and their practice Implementation 3. Construction company Construction works ordered by Tallinn Environment Department Other 4. Tallinn Botanic Garden Getting reconstructed channel in their territory Other 5. Citizens of Tallinn Getting new information Determination of design details of the measure 6. 4People OÜ Innovative approach, all design was made by Gen Mandre from 4people OÜ (www.4people.ee). He is also involved in the project “(D)rain for Life” which is concentrated on Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) - http://drainforlife.eu/index.php/en/). Lessons, risks, implications... Key lessons Not available yet Financing mechanism information Project was financed by LIFE+, Minitry of the Environment of Finland and City of Tallinn financing funding solutions Usaually LIFE+ cofinancing is 50% but in agreement the share was raised based on the co-financing of Finnish MoE to 84,91% which left to City of Tallinn co-financing share of 15,09 % Success factor(s) Success factor type Success factor role Comments Financing possibilities main factor Legal obligations secondary factor Other main factor Financing Financing type Comments EU-funds: LIFE+ LIFE+ project “Benchmarking water protection in cities – CITYWATER” (LIFE 11 ENV/FI/000909) Local funds Cofinancing by City of Tallinn Other Cofinancing by Ministry of the Environment of Finland Barrier Barrier type Barrier role Comments Other main barrier 1. The biggest drawback was caused by weather. Because of the long and heavy raining period, movement for mechanisms was hindered; on both sides of the watercourse different collections of trees were planted and the area for mechanisms to move was quite narrow. 2. One more drawback was with electrical cable, which was mentioned in the project, but the location (depth) was different. The problem was solved by adding one extra culvert under the cable and rebuilding one small section to ensure the right slope. 3. Soil erosion, which was caused by heavy rain again, was solved by placing natural grass carpet instead of waiting grass to grow from seeds. Driver Driver type Driver role Comments Legal obligations main driver Achieving good ecological quality of waters by 2015 (WFD) Other main driver Availability of funds - measeure was implemented in frame of the LIFE+ project “Benchmarking water protection in cities – CITYWATER” (LIFE 11 ENV/FI/000909) Financing share Financing share type Share Comments European funds 84.91 LIFE + and Finnish MoE together - 84,91 % View National funds 15.09 Tallinn City - 15,09 % View Policy, general governance and design targets Policy description There are in total 9 ponds in the territory of Tallinn Botanic Garden, some of them feed on springs and the water collected in the Botanic Garden´s territory but most of the water is coming from Lepiku channel (catchment 150,4 ha). Most of the ponds were built in 1963-1965 on channels that existed before. The Lepiku channel that is feeding the ponds of Botanic Garden has not been cleaned for years. Additionally the channel is partly closed to pipes which hinder water runoff and self-cleaning of water. The ponds have been cleaned and the banks been fixed depending on financial possibilities. In last ten years it was noticed that in the years that were warmer and had less precipitation the water started to “bloom” – satiated with different algae and aquatic plants were proliferating which refers to nitrogen and phosphorus compounds’ inflow from Lepiku channel catchment where a lot of new buildings have been built. It is also possible that the bottom of one pond is polluted by fuel oil that that was flowing in there from a boiler house that was situated in the bank of the pond in 1980s. That meant that excessive amount of suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds and possibly oil products end up in the gulf of Finland that is 2,5 km away via Pirita river. Part of wider plan 1 Policy target Target purpose Pollutants Removal Policy pressure Pressure directive Relevant pressure Policy area Policy area type Policy area focus Name Comments Policy impact Impact directive Relevant impact Policy wider plan Wider plan type Wider plan focus Name Comments Local Water Development plan of Tallinn 2009-2027 5th main objective: citizen of Tallinn connecting sustainably home, work and rest – Tallinn with cosy, inspiring and environmentally sustainable urban space, 5.4 Technical infrastructure services are of high quality, available for residents of the city and meet the safety and environmental protection requirements Measure 2: guaranteeing channelling of storm and surface water Link to the document: https://www.tallinn.ee/eng/g3230s54397 Local Water Tallinn Environmental Strategy 2030 Point 2.3.1.3.(Coastal waters) states that the aim is to restore the ecological balance in marine environment and guaranteediversity of nature and achieve in necessary water quality in the recreational areas. Point 2.3.2 (rain water) emphasizes the need to work out concept for rain/storm water removal. Link to the document: http://issuu.com/tallinna_keskkonnaamet/docs/strateegia_ingl/3?e=0 Local Water Tallinn public water supply and sewerage development plan 2010-2021 Point 10 (storm water systems) maps the bottlenecks related to storm water removal, including the degrading impact of water flowing in from the urban region to the status of Tallinn Botanic Garden ponds both in quantitative and qualitative way, which in turn degrades the quality of storm water flowing in Pirita river Local Water Tallinn stormwater strategy to 2030 Point 3.2.11 (new catchments) foresees the development of Lepiku-Laiaküla catchment as the area needs researches and development of holistic solution in order to guarantee storm water removal and good status of Tallinn Botanic Garden ponds. Point 6.1 sets the strategic aim to achieve ecological status of storm water recipients (coastal sea and inland water bodies of Tallinn) and continuous improving of the storm water quality that flows in the recipient water bodies. Policy requirement directive Requirement directive Specification Socio-economic Direct benefits information Reconstruction and cleaning of the Lepiku channel means that cleaner water will flow in to the Botanic Garden’ s ponds and later in Pirita river and in the Gulf of Finland – this way improving the ecological status of water. Ancillary benefits information The reconstruction of the Lepiku channel on the territory of Tallinn Botanic Garden may be handled as a pilot project, the objective of which is to raise awareness of the residents of the area. In the lower course of the reconstructed ditch the self-cleaning system should be more effective than in the straight, piped upper course, as is the case at the moment in the upper course. The innovation, by most part, lies in the fact that with very simple means and relatively low cost it is possible to build a self-cleaning, aesthetically enjoyable rainwater handling solution. The solution will help the residents of the drainage area to understand the need the importance of water conservation and offers inspiration to land owners whose land the ditch passes through, and hopefully helps them to understand that an attractively and effectively built ditch will increase the value of their land, rather than be a possible area for problems. Costs investment 35000 Costs investment information reconstruction works including materials and designn Information on Ecosystem improved biodiversity No information Information on Ecosystem provisioning services No information Ecosystem impact climate regulation No information available Biophysical impacts Information on Water quality overall improvements In last ten years it was noticed that in the years that were warmer and had less precipitation the water started to “bloom” – satiated with different algae and aquatic plants were proliferating which refers to nitrogen and phosphorus inflow from Lepiku channel catchment where a lot of new buildings have been built. It is also possible that the bottom of one pond is polluted by fuel oil that that was flowing in there from a boiler house that was situated in the bank of the pond in 1980s. That meant that excessive amount of suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds and possibly oil products end up in the gulf of Finland that is 2,5 km away via Pirita river. Reconstruction and cleaning of the Lepiku channel means that cleaner water will flow in to the Botanic Garden’ s ponds and later in Pirita river and in the Gulf of Finland – this way improving the ecological status of water. As works are not yet finalised then chane cannot be estimated. Full Context Collection(aka Doorway or Gallery) Case Studies Pathway(aka Context) Default view Area(aka Level or Site) ALL