The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mitigation of Impervious Surface Hydrology Using Bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland
Abstract
As an increasingly adopted storm water best management practice to remedy hydrologic impairment from urban imperviousness, bioretention facilities need rigorous field performance research and monitoring to confirm performance and improve design and maintenance recommendations. This study investigated hydrologic performance at six bioretention cells in Maryland [College Park (CP), a 181m2 cell, 50–80cm media depth, monitored for 22 events, and Silver Spring (SS), a 102m2 cell, 90cm media depth, monitored for 60 events] and North Carolina [Greensboro (G1 and G2), each approximately 317m2, 120cm media depth, both monitored for 46 events, and Louisburg (L1=surface area of 162m2, L2=surface area of 99m2); each had 50–60cm fill depths, monitored for 31 and 33 events, respectively] over 10–15month periods. Outflow from each cell was recorded and inflow was either recorded or calculated from rainfall data. In Louisburg, L2 was lined with an impermeable membrane to eliminate exfiltration while L1 was unlined to allow both exfiltration and evapotranspiration. Results indicate that bioretention facilities can achieve substantial hydrologic benefits through delaying and reducing peak flows and decreasing runoff volume. A large cell media volume: drainage area ratio, and adjustments to the drainage configuration appear to improve the performance. Media layer depth may be the primary design parameter controlling hydrologic performance. Performance diminishes as rainfall depths increase and rainfall durations become longer. Annual water budget analysis suggests that approximately 20–50% of runoff entering the bioretention cells was lost to exfiltration and evapotranspiration.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Fletcher, T. D., Andrieu, H., & Hamel, P. (2013) · Advances in Water Resources · doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.09.001 · Cited by 1,015
Coutts, A. M., Tapper, N. J., Beringer, J., Loughnan, M., & Demuzere, M. (2013) · Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment · doi:10.1177/0309133312461032 · Cited by 442
Urban Stormwater Runoff: A New Class of Environmental Flow Problem
Walsh, C. J., Fletcher, T. D., & Burns, M. J. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045814 · Cited by 358
Meeting hydrologic and water quality goals through targeted bioretention design
Hunt, W. F., Davis, A. P., & Traver, R. G. (2012) · Journal of Environmental Engineering · doi:10.1061/(asce)ee.1943-7870.0000504 · Cited by 272
Self-citationReview and Research Needs of Bioretention Used for the Treatment of Urban Stormwater
Liu, J., Sample, D., Bell, C., & Guan, Y. (2014) · Water · doi:10.3390/w6041069 · Cited by 269
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, H., Sharkey, L. J., Hunt, W. F., & Davis, A. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 407-415
- ISSN
- 1084-0699 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-5584
- DOI
- 10.1061/(asce)1084-0699(2009)14:4(407
- OpenAlex
- W2152536419
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mitigation of Impervious Surface Hydrology Using Bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1061/(asce)1084-0699(2009)14:4(407
- The paper
- Li, H., Sharkey, L. J., Hunt, W. F., & Davis, A. P. (2009). Mitigation of Impervious Surface Hydrology Using Bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0699(2009)14%3A4(407
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.