1,559
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 193:
Line 193: March/April.</ref> Line 203:
Line 203: Line 212:
Line 213: paver and crushed stone driveways in Connecticut. Water Research 40: 826-832.</ref>Line 243:
Line 260: |-|style="text-align: center;" |Mississauga|style="text-align: center;" |61 to 99%|style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://cvc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/IMAX-Low-Impact-Development-Monitoring-Case-Study-may-24.pdf CVC (2018)]</span>|-|style="text-align: center;" |Montreal|style="text-align: center;" |26 to 98%|style="text-align: center;" |Vaillancourt ''et al.'' (2019) <ref>Vaillancourt, C., Duchesne, S., & Pelletier, G. 2019. Hydrologic performance of permeable pavement as an adaptive measure in urban areas: case studies near Montreal, Canada. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 24(8), 05019020.</ref>|-|style="text-align: center;" |Northern Ohio|style="text-align: center;" |16 to 99%|style="text-align: center;" |Winston ''et al.'' (2015) <ref>Winston, R. J., Dorsey, J. D., & Hunt, W. F. (2015). Monitoring the performance of bioretention and permeable pavement stormwater controls in Northern Ohio: hydrology, water quality, and maintenance needs. Chagrin River Watershed Partners. Inc. under NOAA award No. NA09NOS4190153.</ref>|-|style="text-align: center;" |Seoul, Korea|style="text-align: center;" |30 to 65%|style="text-align: center;" |Shafique ''et al.'' (2018) <ref>Shafique, M., Kim, R. and Kyung-Ho, K., 2018. Rainfall runoff mitigation by retrofitted permeable pavement in an urban area. Sustainability, 10(4), p.1231.</ref>Line 265:
Line 266:
→Water Balance
!'''Reference'''
!'''Reference'''
|-
|-
|rowspan="6" style="text-align: center;" | Permeable pavement without underdrain
|rowspan="7" style="text-align: center;" | Permeable pavement without underdrain
|style="text-align: center;" |Guelph, Ontario
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |90%
|style="text-align: center;" |King City, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |James (2002)<ref>James, W. 2002. Green Roads: Research into Permeable Pavers. Stormwater.
|style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: In this study, there was no underdrain in the pavement base, but an underdrain was located 1 m below the native soils to allow for sampling of infiltrated water. Temporary water storage fluctuations in the base were similar to those expected in a no underdrain design." >99%*</span></u>'''
|style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2013/03/PP_FactsheetSept2011-compressed.pdf TRCA (2008)]</span><ref>TRCA. 2008. Permeable Pavement and Bioretention Swale Demonstration Project. Seneca College, King City, Ontario. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2013/03/PP_FactsheetSept2011-compressed.pdf</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Pennsylvania
|style="text-align: center;" |Pennsylvania
|style="text-align: center;" |Kwiatkowski et al. (2007)<ref name="example1">Kwiatkowski, M., Welker, A.L., Traver, R.G., Vanacore, M., Ladd. T. 2007. Evaluation of an infiltration best management practice utilizing pervious concrete. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. Vol. 43. No. 5. pp. 1208-1222.</ref>
|style="text-align: center;" |Kwiatkowski et al. (2007)<ref name="example1">Kwiatkowski, M., Welker, A.L., Traver, R.G., Vanacore, M., Ladd. T. 2007. Evaluation of an infiltration best management practice utilizing pervious concrete. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. Vol. 43. No. 5. pp. 1208-1222.</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |France
|style="text-align: center;" |Connecticut
|style="text-align: center;" |97%
|style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences in runoff volume between the practice and a conventional impervious surface over the period of monitoring." >72%*</span></u>'''
|style="text-align: center;" |Legret and Colandini (1999)<ref>Legret, M and V. Colandani. 1999. Effects of a porous pavement structure with a reservoir structure on runoff water: water quality and fate of metals. Water Science and Technology. 39(2): 111-117</ref>
|style="text-align: center;" |Gilbert and Clausen (2006)<ref>Gilbert, J. and J. Clausen. 2006. Stormwater runoff quality and quantity from asphalt,
paver and crushed stone driveways in Connecticut. Water Research 40: 826-832.</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Washington
|style="text-align: center;" |Washington
performance of permeable pavement systems. Water Research 37(18): 4369-4376 </ref>
performance of permeable pavement systems. Water Research 37(18): 4369-4376 </ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Connecticut
|style="text-align: center;" |Guelph, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences in runoff volume between the practice and a conventional impervious surface over the period of monitoring." >72%*</span></u>'''
|style="text-align: center;" |90%
|style="text-align: center;" |Gilbert and Clausen (2006)<ref>Gilbert, J. and J. Clausen. 2006. Stormwater runoff quality and quantity from asphalt,
|style="text-align: center;" |James (2002)<ref>James, W. 2002. Green Roads: Research into Permeable Pavers. Stormwater.
March/April.</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |King City, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |France
|style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: In this study, there was no underdrain in the pavement base, but an underdrain was located 1 m below the native soils to allow for sampling of infiltrated water. Temporary water storage fluctuations in the base were similar to those expected in a no underdrain design." >99%*</span></u>'''
|style="text-align: center;" |97%
|style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2013/03/PP_FactsheetSept2011-compressed.pdf TRCA (2008)]</span>
|style="text-align: center;" |Legret and Colandini (1999)<ref>Legret, M and V. Colandani. 1999. Effects of a porous pavement structure with a reservoir structure on runoff water: water quality and fate of metals. Water Science and Technology. 39(2): 111-117</ref>
|-
|-
|rowspan="10" style="text-align: center;" | Permeable pavement with underdrain
|rowspan="10" style="text-align: center;" | Permeable pavement with underdrain
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Montreal
|style="text-align: center;" |26 to 98%
|style="text-align: center;" |Vaillancourt ''et al.'' (2019) <ref>Vaillancourt, C., Duchesne, S., & Pelletier, G. 2019. Hydrologic performance of permeable pavement as an adaptive measure in urban areas: case studies near Montreal, Canada. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 24(8), 05019020.</ref>
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Mississauga
|style="text-align: center;" |61 to 99%
|style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://cvc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/IMAX-Low-Impact-Development-Monitoring-Case-Study-may-24.pdf CVC (2018)]</span><ref>CVC. 2018. Case Study: Monitoring Low Impact Development at the IMAX demonstration site. February, 2018. https://cvc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/IMAX-Low-Impact-Development-Monitoring-Case-Study-may-24.pdf</ref>
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Seoul, Korea
|style="text-align: center;" |30 to 65%
|style="text-align: center;" |Shafique ''et al.'' (2018) <ref>Shafique, M., Kim, R. and Kyung-Ho, K., 2018. Rainfall runoff mitigation by retrofitted permeable pavement in an urban area. Sustainability, 10(4), p.1231.</ref>
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Northern Ohio
|style="text-align: center;" |16 to 99%
|style="text-align: center;" |Winston ''et al.'' (2015) <ref>Winston, R. J., Dorsey, J. D., & Hunt, W. F. (2015). Monitoring the performance of bioretention and permeable pavement stormwater controls in Northern Ohio: hydrology, water quality, and maintenance needs. Chagrin River Watershed Partners. Inc. under NOAA award No. NA09NOS4190153.</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Vaughan, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |Vaughan, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences in runoff volume between the practice and a conventional impervious surface over the period of monitoring.">45%*</span></u>'''
|style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences in runoff volume between the practice and a conventional impervious surface over the period of monitoring.">45%*</span></u>'''
|style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2016/02/KPP-Ext_FinalReport_Dec2015.pdf Van Seters and Drake (2015)]</span>
|style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2016/02/KPP-Ext_FinalReport_Dec2015.pdf Van Seters and Drake (2015)]</span><ref>Van Seters, T. and Drake, J. 2015. Five Year Performance Evaluation of Permeable Pavements. Kortright, Vaughan - Final Draft. December 2015. © Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2016/02/KPP-Ext_FinalReport_Dec2015.pdf</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |North Carolina
|style="text-align: center;" |North Carolina
|style="text-align: center;" |45% to 60%
|style="text-align: center;" |45% to 60%
|style="text-align: center;" |Schueler ''et al.'' (1987)<ref>Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling urban runoff: a practical manual for planning and designing urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Washington, DC. </ref>
|style="text-align: center;" |Schueler ''et al.'' (1987)<ref>Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling urban runoff: a practical manual for planning and designing urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Washington, DC. </ref>
|-
|-
| colspan="2" style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: This estimate is provided only for the purpose of initial screening of LID practices suitable for achieving stormwater management objectives and targets. Performance of individual facilities will vary depending on site specific contexts and facility design parameters and should be estimated as part of the design process and submitted with other documentation for review by the approval authority." >Runoff Reduction Estimate*</span></u>'''
| colspan="2" style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: This estimate is provided only for the purpose of initial screening of LID practices suitable for achieving stormwater management objectives and targets. Performance of individual facilities will vary depending on site specific contexts and facility design parameters and should be estimated as part of the design process and submitted with other documentation for review by the approval authority." >Runoff Reduction Estimate*</span></u>'''
|-
|-
|}
|}
In Canadian and Swedish field studies, vacuum cleaning could only partially restore the surface infiltration capacity of permeable interlocking concrete pavers (PICP) with large spatial variability in the observed infiltration rates post cleaning.<ref> Drake, J., Bradford, A. 2013. Assessing the Potential for Restoration of Surface Permeability for Permeable Pavements Through Maintenance. Water Science and Technology. 2013, 68, 1950-1958. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24225094/ </ref> <ref>Al-Rubaei, A.M., Stenglein, A.L., Viklander, M., Blecken, G.T. 2013. Long-Term Hydraulic Performance of Porous Asphalt Pavements in Northern Sweden. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering. 39 (6) June 2013. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%29IR.1943-4774.0000569 </ref> Potential options for rehabilitating clogged permeable pavements identified to date include combining pressure washing with pure vacuum sweeping to help dislodge sediment accumulated within joints of PICP and porous asphalt <ref> Seghal, K.S., Drake, J., Van Seters, T., Vander Linden, W.K. 2018. Improving Restorative Maintenance Practices for Mature Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavements. Water. 10 (11), 1588. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/10/11/1588 </ref> <ref> Winston, R.J., Al-Rubaei, A.M., Blecken, G.T., Viklander, M., Hunt, W.F. 2016. Maintenance measures for preservation and recovery of permeable pavement surface infiltration rate – The effects of street sweeping, vacuum cleaning, high pressure washing and milling. Journal of Environmental Management. 169(2016):132-144. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479715304412c </ref> <ref> Al-Rubaei, A.M., et al., 2013. Long-term hydraulic performance of porous asphalt pavements in Northern Sweden. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 139 (6), 499–505. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%29IR.1943-4774.0000569 </ref>, and in pores of pervious concrete<ref> Chopra, M., et al., 2010. Effect of Rejuvenation Methods on the Infiltration Rates of Pervious Concrete Pavements. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 15 (6), 426–433. https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/effect-of-rejuvenation-methods-on-the-infiltration-rates-of-pervi </ref>. Drainage performance evaluations of aged pervious concrete have shown its permeability does not decline as rapidly with age as PICP, but that vacuum cleaning techniques tested to date provide variable or insignificant restorative effect<ref> Drake, J., Bradford, A. 2013. Assessing the Potential for Restoration of Surface Permeability for Permeable Pavements Through Maintenance. Water Science and Technology. 2013, 68, 1950-1958. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24225094/ </ref> <ref>Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP). 2019. Permeable Pavements Maintenance. Technical Brief. October 2019. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2019/10/PDF-PP-maintenance-tech-brief_Oct2019.pdf </ref>
===Water Quality===
===Water Quality===