Bioretention Outflow: Does It Mimic Nonurban Watershed Shallow Interflow?
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 16, Issue 3
Abstract
Bioretention, a key structural practice of low impact development (LID), has been proved to decrease peak flow rates and volumes, promote infiltration and evapotranspiration, and improve water quality. Exactly how well bioretention mimics predevelopment (or “natural”) hydrology is an important research question. Do bioretention outflow rates mirror shallow groundwater interevent stream recharge flow associated with natural or nonurban watersheds? Streamflow from three small, nonurban watersheds, located in Piedmont, part of central North Carolina, was compared with bioretention outflow from four cells also in North Carolina’s Piedmont region. Each benchmark watershed drained to a small stream, where flow rate was monitored for an extended period of time. After normalizing the flow rates and volumes by watershed size, data were combined to form two data sets: bioretention outflow and stream interevent flow. Results indicate that there is no statistical difference between flow rates in streams draining undeveloped watersheds and bioretention outflow rates for the first 24 h following the commencement of flow. Similarly, there is no statistical difference between the cumulative volumes released by the two systems during the 48 h following the start of flow. These results indicate that bioretention cells behave comparably to watersheds in natural or nonurban conditions, with respect to both flow rates and flow volumes, and suggest that bioretention outflows may mirror post–storm event shallow groundwater interevent stream recharge flow. Solely considering bioretention outflow as a conjugate to runoff may be a misinterpretation of a flowrate that actually resembles shallow interflow.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Coffman, L., Green, R., Clar, M., and Bitter, S. (1993). “Design considerations associated with bioretention practices.” Water management in the 90’s: A time for innovation, K. Hon, ed., ASCE, Reston, VA, 130–133.
Chang, N.-B. (2010). “Hydrological connections between low-impact development, watershed best management practices, and sustainable development.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 15(6), 384–385.
Davis, A. P. (2005). “Green engineering principles promote low-impact development.” Environ. Sci. Technol., 39(16), 338A–344A.
Davis, A. P. (2008). “Field performance of bioretention: Hydrology impacts.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 13(2), 90–95.
Davison, A. C., and Hinkley, D. V. (1997). Bootstrap methods and their application, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Dietz, M. E. (2007). “Low impact development practices: A review of current research and recommendations for future directions.” Water, Air, Soil Pollut., 186(1-4), 351–363.
Hunt, W. F., Jarrett, A. R., Smith, J. T., and Sharkey, L. J. (2006). “Evaluating bioretention hydrology and nutrient removal at three field sites in North Carolina.” J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 132(6), 600–608.
Hunt, W. F., Smith, J. T., Jadlocki, S. J., Hathaway, J. M., and Eubanks, P. R. (2008). “Pollutant removal and peak flow mitigation by a bioretention cell in urban Charlotte, NC.” J. Environ. Eng., 134(5), 403–408.
Li, H., Sharkey, L. J., Hunt, W. F., and Davis, A. P. (2009). “Mitigation of impervious surface hydrology using bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 14(4), 407–415.
Line, D. E., and White, N. M. (2007). “Effects of development on runoff and pollutant export.” Water Environ. Res., 79(2), 185–190.
Meyer, S. C. (2004). “Analysis of base flow trends in urban streams, northeastern Illinois, USA.” Hydrogeol. J., 13(5-6), 871–885.
Miller, D. P. (2004). “Bootstrap 101: Obtain robust confidence intervals for any statistic.” Proc., Twenty-Ninth Annual SAS Users Group International Conference, SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). (2008). “Soil data mart.” 〈http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Default.aspx〉 (Aug. 2, 2010).
Nelson, R. A., Smith, J. A., and Miller, A. J. (2006). “Evolution of channel morphology and hydrologic response in an urbanizing drainage basin.” Earth Surf. Processes Landforms, 31(9), 1063–1079.
North Carolina State Climate Office (NCSCO). (2008). “Climate normals.” 〈http://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu〉 (Dec. 15, 2008).
Passeport, E., Hunt, W. F., Line, D. E., Smith, R. A., and Brown, R. A. (2009). “Field study of the ability of two grassed bioretention cells to reduce storm-water runoff pollution.” J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 135(4), 505–510.
Phillips, P. J., and Bode, R. W. (2004). “Pesticides in surface water runoff in southeastern New York State, USA: Seasonal and stormflow effects on concentrations.” Pest Manage. Sci., 60(6), 531–543.
Rose, S., and Peters, N. E. (2001). “Effects of urbanization on streamflow in the Atlanta area (Georgia, USA): A comparative hydrological approach.” Hydrol. Processes, 15(8), 1441–1457.
Sala, M., and Inbar, M. (1992). “Some hydrologic effects of urbanization in Catalan Rivers.” Catena, 19(3-4), 363–378.
Schoonover, J. E., Lockaby, B. G., and Helms, B. S. (2006). “Impacts of land cover on stream hydrology in the West Georgia Piedmont, USA.” J Environ. Qual., 35(6), 2123–2131.
Sharkey, L. J. (2006). “The performance of bioretention areas in North Carolina: A study of water quality, water quantity, and soil media.” M.S. thesis, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC.
Vicars-Groening, J., and Williams, H. F. L. (2006). “Impact of urbanization on storm response of White Rock Creek, Dallas, TX.” Environ. Geol., 51, 1263–1269.
Wheeler, A. P., Angermeier, P. L., and Rosenberger, A. E. (2005). “Impacts of new highways and subsequent landscape urbanization on stream habitat and biota.” Rev. Fish. Sci., 13(3), 141–164.
Widianarko, B., Verwejj, R. A., Van Gestel, C. A. M., and Van Straalen, N. M. (2000). “Spatial distribution of trace metals in sediments from urban streams of Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia.” Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 46, 95–100.
USEPA. (2000). “Low impact development (LID): A literature review.” EPA-841-B-00-005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 16 • Issue 3 • March 2011
Pages: 274 - 279
Copyright
© 2011 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 23, 2009
Accepted: Aug 17, 2010
Published online: Sep 4, 2010
Published in print: Mar 1, 2011
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.