Incorrect Sizing Calculation Methods for Bioretention Cells
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 28, Issue 11
Abstract
Water quality control bioretention cells are usually sized so that they are large enough to provide storage of runoff generated from its catchment resulting from the water quality control design storm of the location of interest. A bioretention cell can have three parts where runoff may be temporarily stored: (1) the depressed surface ponding area, (2) the growing media layer, and (3) the storage layer. In this study, the detailed sizing calculation methods adopted by 21 jurisdictions in the US and Canada were reviewed and compared. It was found that for satisfying the required storage volume to store runoff generated from the water quality control design storm, some jurisdictions only allow the storage provided by the surface ponding area to be counted, whereas other jurisdictions allow the sum of the storages provided by two of the three or all of the three parts to be counted. These differences can result in significant differences in the sizes and performances of bioretention cells. By examining and analyzing the detailed hydrologic processes involved in the operation of bioretention cells, it was demonstrated in this study that many of the adopted sizing calculation methods are flawed or inappropriate. Presented here are a summary of the findings and the recommended sizing calculation method. The possible degrees of over- or underdesigns resulting from some of the incorrect sizing calculation methods are also estimated.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
References
Antoszek, J., and C. Denich. 2018. Addressing stormwater in Ontario using green infrastructure: The new Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change low impact development stormwater management manual TRIECA. Toronto: Ministry of Environment and Climate Change.
Aquafor Beech & Earthfx. 2016. “Runoff volume control targets for Ontario.” In Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of the Environment & Climate Change. Toronto: Aquafor Beech.
Bonneau, J., T. D. Fletcher, J. F. Costelloe, P. J. Poelsma, R. B. James, and M. J. Burns. 2020. “The hydrologic, water quality and flow regime performance of a bioretention basin in Melbourne, Australia.” Urban Water J. 17 (4): 303–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2020.1769688.
City of Calgary. 2016. Low impact development guidelines, bioretentions and bioswales. Calgray, AB, Canada: MPE Engineering Limited and Kerr Wood Leidal Consulting Engineers.
City of Flagstaff, AZ. 2009. Low impact development—Guidance manual for site design and implementation. Flagstaff, AZ: City of Flagstaff, Stormwater Management Section.
City of Scottsdale, City of Phoenix, and Other Member Communities. 2019. Greater Phoenix metro green infrastructure handbook, low-impact development details for alternative stormwater management. Scottsdale, AZ: Phoenix.
CVC and TRCA (Credit Valley Conservation and Toronto Region Conservation Authority, Ontario, Canada). 2010. Low impact development stormwater management planning and design guide. Toronto: CVC & TRCA.
Dagenais, D., J. Brisson, and T. D. Fletcher. 2018. “The role of plants in bioretention systems: Does the science underpin current guidance?” Ecol. Eng. 120 (Sep): 532–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.07.007.
Davis, A. P., W. F. Hunt, R. G. Traver, and M. Clar. 2009. “Bioretention technology: Overview of current practice and future needs.” J. Environ. Eng. 135 (3): 109–117. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2009)135:3(109).
Denich, C., and A. Bradford. 2010. “Estimation of evapotranspiration from bioretention areas using weighing lysimeters.” J. Hydrol. Eng. 15 (6): 522–530. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000134.
Denver UDFCD (Urban Drainage and Flood Control District). 2015. Urban storm drainage criteria manual, volume 3: Best management practices, 80211. Denver: Urban Drainage and Flood Control District.
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-007-9484-z.
Dietz, M. E., and J. C. Clausen. 2006. “Saturation to improve pollutant retention in a rain garden.” Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 (4): 1335–1340. https://doi.org/10.1021/es051644f.
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District. 2012. Stormwater source control design guidelines. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District.
Kratky, H., Z. Li, Y. Chen, C. Wang, T. Yu, and X. Li. 2017. “A critical literature review of bioretention research for stormwater management in cold climate and future research recommendations.” Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 11 (Aug): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-017-0982-y.
Li, G., J. Xiong, J. Zhu, Y. Liu, and M. Dzakpasu. 2021. “Design influence and evaluation model of bioretention in rainwater treatment: A review.” Sci. Total Environ. 787 (Sep): 147592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147592.
Liu, J., D. Sample, C. Bell, and Y. Guan. 2014. “Review and research needs of bioretention used for the treatment of urban stormwater.” Water 6 (4): 1069–1099. https://doi.org/10.3390/w6041069.
Marvin, J. T., E. Passeport, and J. Drake. 2020. “State-of-the-art review of phosphorus sorption amendments in bioretention media: A systematic literature review.” J. Sustainable Water Built Environ. 6 (1): 03119001. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSWBAY.000089.
Maryland Dept. of Environment. 2009. Maryland stormwater design manual, volume I and II, 21224. Baltimore: Maryland Dept. of Environment.
Montana DEQ (Dept. of Environmental Quality). 2017. Montana post-construction storm water BMP design guidance manual. 1st ed. 59601. Helena, MT: Montana DEQ.
MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency). 2021. Minnesota stormwater manual, 55155. St. Paul, MN: MPCA.
NCDEQ (North Carolina Dept. of Environmental Quality). 2020. Stormwater design manual. Raleigh, NC: NCDEQ.
NCTCOG (North Central Texas Council of Governments). 2014. iSMM™—Technical manual—Site development controls, 76011. Arlington, TX: NCTCOG.
NYS DEC (New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation). 2015. New York state stormwater management design manual, 12233. New York: NYS DEC.
Pennsylvania DEP (Dept. of Environmental Protection). 2006. “Pennsylvania stormwater best management practices manual.” In Bureau of watershed management, 17101. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania DEP.
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 2011. Design handbook for low impact development best management practices, 92501. Riverside, CA: Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
Rowe, E., Y. Guo, and Z. Li. 2021. “Seeking more cost-efficient design criteria for infiltration trenches.” J. Sustainable Water Built Environ. 7 (3): 04021009. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSWBAY.0000951.
Sacramento Region, CA. 2018. Stormwater quality design manual for the Sacramento region. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento Region, CA.
Sarasota County, FL. 2015. Sarasota county low impact development guidance document, 34240. Sarasota, FL: Sarasota County, FL.
SCDHEC (South Carolina Dept. of Health and Environmental Control). 2005. Storm water management BMP handbook, 29201. Columbia, SC: SCDHEC.
SEMCOG (Southeast Michigan Council of Governments). 2008. Low impact development manual for Michigan: A design guide for implementors and reviewers. Detroit: SEMCOG.
Skorobogatov, A., J. He, A. Chu, C. Valeo, and B. Van Duin. 2020. “The impact of media, plants and their interactions on bioretention performance: A review.” Sci. Total Environ. 715 (May): 136918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136918.
Smyth, K., J. Drake, Y. Li, C. Rochman, T. Van Seters, and E. Passeport. 2021. “Bioretention cells remove microplastics from urban stormwater.” Water Res. 191 (Mar): 116785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116785.
Spraakman, S., T. F. M. Rodgers, H. Monri-Fung, A. Nowicki, M. L. Diamond, E. Passeport, M. Thuna, and J. Drake. 2020. “A need for standardized reporting: A scoping review of bioretention research 2000–2019.” Water 12 (11): 3122. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12113122.
State of Washington. 2019a. Stormwater management manual for Eastern Washington. Seattle: Dept. of Ecology.
State of Washington. 2019b. Stormwater management manual for Western Washington. Seattle: Dept. of Ecology.
Tirpak, R. A., A. M. Afrooz, R. J. Winston, R. Valenca, K. Schiff, and S. K. Mohanty. 2021a. “Conventional and amended bioretention soil media for targeted pollutant treatment: A critical review to guide the state of the practice.” Water Res. 189 (Feb): 116648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116648.
Tirpak, R. A., J. M. Hathaway, A. Khojandi, M. Weathers, and T. H. Epps. 2021b. “Building resiliency to climate change uncertainty through bioretention design modifications.” J. Environ. Manage. 287 (Jun): 112300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112300.
Uda, M., T. Van Seters, C. Graham, and L. Rocha. 2013. Assessment of life cycle costs for low impact development stormwater management practices. Toronto: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
USEPA. 1999. Storm water technology fact sheet: Bioretention. Washington, DC: USEPA.
USEPA. 2021. Stormwater best management practice: Bioretention (Rain Gardens). Washington, DC: USEPA.
Vijayaraghavan, K., B. K. Biswal, M. G. Adam, S. H. Soh, D. L. Tsen-Tieng, A. P. Davis, S. H. Chew, P. Y. Tan, V. Babovic, and R. Balasubramanian. 2021. “Bioretention systems for stormwater management: Recent advances and future prospects.” J. Environ. Manage. 292 (2021): 112766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112766.
Walton County, FL. 2019. Stormwater management for single-family residential lots, Volume 3–Design your own LID SWMF, 32433. DeFuniak Springs, FL: Walton County, FL.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 28 • Issue 11 • November 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 10, 2023
Accepted: Jul 17, 2023
Published online: Sep 11, 2023
Published in print: Nov 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Feb 11, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Business management
- Design (by type)
- Engineering fundamentals
- Environmental engineering
- Hydraulic design
- Hydrologic engineering
- Hydrology
- Jurisdiction
- Laws and regulations
- Legal affairs
- Management methods
- Practice and Profession
- Quality control
- Retention basins
- Runoff
- Stilling basins
- Waste management
- Waste sites
- Waste storage
- Water and water resources
- Water management
- Water quality
- Water storage
- Water supply
- Water supply systems
- Water treatment
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.