Difference between revisions of "Wetlands"

From LID SWM Planning and Design Guide
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 102: Line 102:


==Performance==
==Performance==
Relative to a wet pond, a constructed wetland may offer added pollutant removal benefits due to enhanced biological uptake and the filtration effects of the vegetation.
STEP (under previous name SWAMP) conducted their own research into the performance of stormwater wetlands, the project page and report can be viewed [https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/home/urban-runoff-green-infrastructure/conventional-stormwater-management/constructed-wetlands/performance-assessment-of-an-open-and-covered-stormwater-wetland-system-aurora-ontario/ here].
STEP (under previous name SWAMP) conducted their own research into the performance of stormwater wetlands, the project page and report can be viewed [https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/home/urban-runoff-green-infrastructure/conventional-stormwater-management/constructed-wetlands/performance-assessment-of-an-open-and-covered-stormwater-wetland-system-aurora-ontario/ here].



Revision as of 01:21, 29 September 2018

Wetlands fed by stormwater at Kortright Farm, Vaughan ON

Overview[edit]

Constructed wetlands are similar to SWM ponds in function and design, with the most significant difference being that they are designed to incorporate shallow zones for wetland plants. A facility is normally characterized as a wetland if shallow zones (<0.5 m deep) make up more than 70 % of its volume.

Wetlands are an ideal technology for:

  • Text A
  • Text B
Types of Constructed Wetland
Type A Type B Type C
Surface water Minimal
Any surface flow can be slowed with check dams
Ponding is encouraged with check dams
Soil Filter media required Amendment preferable when possible
Underdrain Common Uncommon
Maintenance Medium to high Low
Stormwater benefit High Moderate
Biodiversity benefit Increased with native planting Typically lower

Planning considerations[edit]

Design[edit]

Element Design Objective Criteria
Drainage Area Sustaining vegetation, volumetric turnover 5 Ha (≥10 Ha preferred)
Treatment Volume Provision of appropriate level of protection (Table 3.2) See Table 3.2
Active Storage Detention Suspended solids settling 24 hrs (12 hrs if in conflict with min. orifice size)
Forebay Pre-treatment
  1. Minimum depth: 1 m;
  2. Sized to ensure non-erosive velocities leaving forebay;
  3. Maximum area: 20 % of total permanent pool
Length-to-Width Ratio Maximize flow path and minimize short-circuiting potential
  1. Overall: minimum 3:1;
  2. Forebay: minimum 2:1
Permanent Pool Depth Vegetation requirements, rapid settling The average permanent pool depth should range from 150 mm to 300 mm
Active Storage Depth Storage/flow control, sustaining vegetation Maximum 1.0 m for storms < 10 year event
Side Slopes Safety
  1. 5:1 For 3 m above and below permanent pool;
  2. Maximum 3:1 elsewhere
Inlet Avoid clogging/freezing
  1. Minimum 450 mm;
  2. Preferred pipe slope: >1%;
  3. If submerged, obvert 150 mm below expected maximum ice depth
Outlet Avoid clogging/freezing
  1. Minimum: 450mm outlet pipe;
  2. Preferred pipe slope: >1%;
  3. If orifice control used, 75mm diameter minimum;
  4. Minimum 100mm orifice preferable
Maintenance Access Access for backhoes or dredging equipment
  1. Provided to approval of Municipality;
  2. Provision of maintenance drawdown pipe preferred
Buffer Safety Minimum 7.5 m above maximum water quality/erosion control water level

Performance[edit]

Relative to a wet pond, a constructed wetland may offer added pollutant removal benefits due to enhanced biological uptake and the filtration effects of the vegetation.

STEP (under previous name SWAMP) conducted their own research into the performance of stormwater wetlands, the project page and report can be viewed here.

Gallery[edit]

Construction[edit]

See also[edit]

External links[edit]