Meeting hydrologic and water quality goals through targeted bioretention design
Abstract
Bioretention is one of the most commonly used stormwater control measures (SCMs) in North America and Australasia. However, current design is not targeted to regulatory need, often reflecting an outdated understanding of how and why bioretention works. The purpose of this manuscript is to synthesize research to recommend a suite of design standards focused on the purpose of bioretention SCM. Both hydrologic (peak flow mitigation, infiltration, annual hydrology, and stream stability) and water quality [total suspended solids (TSS) and particulates, pathogen-indicator species, metals, hydrocarbons, phosphorus, nitrogen, and temperature] regulatory and stream ecology needs are addressed. Bioretention cells designed to meet a prioritized subset of those measures would be substantially different than cells that are designed for a different subset of needs. Designers have the ability to adjust bowl volume, media composition, media depth, underdrainage configuration, and vegetation type. This study examines how each of those design parameters can be adjusted such that a “one size fits all” approach is no longer the norm.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Bioretention studies have generally focused on total metal removal.
“Although dissolved metals are more difficult to remove and usually more bioavailable compared to particulate metals, thereby posing a greater risk (Fassman et al., 2013; Flanagan et al., 2019), bioretention studies have generally focused on total metal removal (Hunt et al., 2012).”
From Dissolved metal adsorption capacities and fractionation in filter materials for use in stormwater bioretention facilities (2019) · cites this paper as Hunt et al., 2012
With typical infiltration rates of <300 mm/h, contact times for a 600 mm deep filter are generally at least 2 h, although in practice the infiltration rate varies depending on material, filter depth, root macro pores, bioturbation, and clogging.
“With typical infiltration rates of <300 mm/h (FAWB, 2008; Hunt et al., 2012) contact times for a 600 mm deep filter are generally at least 2 h, although, in practice, the infiltration rate of course varies depending on the type of material, filter depth, root macro pores, bioturbation, and level of clogging.”
From Dissolved metal adsorption capacities and fractionation in filter materials for use in stormwater bioretention facilities (2019) · cites this paper as Hunt et al., 2012
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fletcher, T. D., Shuster, W., Hunt, W. F., Ashley, R., Butler, D., Arthur, S., Trowsdale, S., Barraud, S., Semadeni-Davies, A., Bertrand-Krajewski, J.-L., et al. (2015) · Urban Water Journal · doi:10.1080/1573062x.2014.916314 · Cited by 1,938 · see citing works
Self-citationWinston, R. J., Dorsey, J. D., & Hunt, W. F. (2016) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.081 · Cited by 229 · see citing works
Self-citationManagement of stormwater pollution using green infrastructure: The role of rain gardens
Sharma, R., & Malaviya, P. (2021) · WIREs Water · doi:10.1002/wat2.1507 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Tian, J., Jin, J., Chiu, P. C., Cha, D. K., Guo, M., & Imhoff, P. T. (2019) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2018.10.030 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Søberg, L. C., Winston, R., Viklander, M., & Blecken, G.-T. (2019) · Water Research X · doi:10.1016/j.wroa.2019.100032 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
“With typical infiltration rates of <300mm/h (FAWB, 2008; Hunt et al., 2012) contact times for a 600mm deep filter are generally at”
BackgroundInfluentialAqueous contaminant removal and stormwater treatment using biochar
Miles, T. R., Rasmussen, E. M., & Gray, M. (2016) · SSSA Special Publications · doi:10.2136/sssaspecpub63.2014.0048.5 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hunt, W. F., Davis, A. P., & Traver, R. G.
- Affiliations
- North Carolina State University (US)
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- Villanova University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Engineering
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 138
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 698-707
- ISSN
- 0733-9372 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-7870
- OpenAlex
- W2085809509
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 7.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Environmental Engineering (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Heat Island Mitigation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
- Keywords
- bioretention, stormwater control measures, infiltration, stream stability, total suspended solids, metals, hydrocarbons, phosphorus, nitrogen, water temperature, media composition, media depth, vegetation types
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
