Cited by 116Urban Stormwater Management SolutionsPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsSoil erosion and sediment transport

The Sources, Impact and Management of Car Park Runoff Pollution: A Review

Revitt, D. Michael, Lundy, Lian, Coulon, Frédéric, Fairley, Martin·2014·Journal of Environmental Management

Abstract

Traffic emissions contribute significantly to the build-up of diffuse pollution loads on urban surfaces with their subsequent mobilisation and direct discharge posing problems for receiving water quality. This review focuses on the impact and mitigation of solids, metals, nutrients and organic pollutants in the runoff deriving from car parks. Variabilities in the discharged pollutant levels and in the potentials for pollutant mitigation complicate an impact assessment of car park runoff. The different available stormwater best management practices and proprietary devices are reported to be capable of reductions of between 20% and almost 100% for both suspended solids and a range of metals. This review contributes to prioritising the treatment options which can achieve the appropriate pollutant reductions whilst conforming to the site requirements of a typical car park. By applying different treatment scenarios to the runoff from a hypothetical car park, it is shown that optimal performance, in terms of ecological benefits for the receiving water, can be achieved using a treatment train incorporating permeable paving and bioretention systems. The review identifies existing research gaps and emphasises the pertinent management practices as well as design issues which are relevant to the mitigation of car park pollution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.041

Cites

127 of 127 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Revitt, D. M., Lundy, L., Coulon, F., & Fairley, M.
Affiliations
  • Middlesex University London (GB)
  • Cranfield University (GB)
Corresponding author
Revitt, D. Michael
Venue
Journal of Environmental Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
146
Pages
552-567
ISSN
0301-4797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004457369
Cited by
116
References
127
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 4
FWCI
0.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Middlesex University Research Repository (Middlesex University Of London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
Keywords
stormwater pollution, vehicle emissions, suspended solids, heavy metals, nutrients, organic pollutants, stormwater best management practices, permeable pavement, bioretention, treatment train, receiving water quality, pollutant mitigation
MeSH terms
Vehicle Emissions, Environmental Monitoring, Rain, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Water Pollution, Chemical, Water Quality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review