Hydrologic and Water Quality Evaluation of Four Permeable Pavements in North Carolina, USA

A permeable pavement parking lot in eastern North Carolina consisting of four types of permeable pavement and standard asphalt was monitored from June 2006 to J uly 2007 for hydrologic differences in pavement surface runoff volumes, total outflow volumes, peak flow rates, and time to peak, and from January 2007 to July 2007 for water quality concentrations. The four permeable sections were pervious concrete (PC), two types of permeable interlocking concrete pavement (PICP) with small-sized aggregate in the joints and having 12.9% (PICP1) and 8.5% (PICP2) open surface area, and concrete grid pavers (CGP) filled with sand. All permeable pavements significantly and substantially reduced surface runoff volumes and peak flow rates from those of asphalt (p<0.01). Of the permeable pavements, CGP generated the greatest surface runoff volumes (p<0.01). The PICP1 and CGP cells generated significantly lower outflow volumes than all other sections evaluated (p<0.01), and had the lowest peak flows and the longest time to peak. The response of the PICP1 cell was likely due to a n increased base storage volume resulting from an elevated pipe underdrain; whereas, the CGP cell response was attributed to water retention in the sand fill layer. Overall, different permeable pavement sections performed similarly, but were substantially different from asphalt. The pH of permeable pavement subsurface drainage was higher than that of asphalt runoff (p<0.01) with the PC cell having the highest pH values (p<0.01). Permeable pavement subsurface drainage had lower NH4-N (p<0.01) and TKN concentrations than asphalt runoff and atmospheric deposition. With the exception of the CGP cell, permeable pavements had higher NO2,3-N concentrations than asphalt (p<0.01), a probable result of nitrification occurring within the permeable pavement profile. Overall, different permeable pavement sections performed similarly to one another with respect to water quality, but the CGP cell appeared to improve stormwater runoff nitrogen concentrations.

[1]  D. Booth,et al.  Long-term stormwater quantity and quality performance of permeable pavement systems. , 2003, Water research.

[2]  C. J. Pratt,et al.  URBAN STORMWATER REDUCTION AND QUALITY IMPROVEMENT THROUGH THE USE OF PERMEABLE PAVEMENTS , 1988 .

[3]  William F. Hunt,et al.  Field Survey of Permeable Pavement Surface Infiltration Rates , 2007 .

[4]  David R. Smith,et al.  Runoff and pollution abatement characteristics of concrete grid pavements , 1981 .

[5]  Ian D L Foster,et al.  The role of urban surfaces (permeable pavements) in regulating drainage and evaporation: development of a laboratory simulation experiment , 1999 .

[6]  A P Newman,et al.  Oil bio-degradation in permeable pavements by microbial communities. , 2002, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[7]  C. J. Pratt,et al.  UK research into the performance of permeable pavement, reservoir structures in controlling stormwater discharge quantity and quality , 1995 .

[8]  William F. Hunt,et al.  Evaluation of Four Permeable Pavement Sites in Eastern North Carolina for Runoff Reduction and Water Quality Impacts , 2007 .

[9]  W F Geiger,et al.  Effective pollutant retention capacity of permeable pavements for infiltrated road runoffs determined by laboratory tests. , 2005, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[10]  D. K. Walkowiak,et al.  Isco open channel flow measurement handbook , 2006 .

[11]  Michael E. Barrett,et al.  Performance, Cost, and Maintenance Requirements of Austin Sand Filters , 2003 .