Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan - OSEH - University ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Case Study: Michigan Avenue Streetscape Bioretention Facilities City of Lansing The project consists of landscape planters and sidewalk paving improvements including new concrete sidewalks and accenting clay pavers, ornamental fences, rain garden plants, and site furnishings. In addition, a series of 27 bioretention facilities inside concrete planter boxes were designed as part of a Michigan Avenue corridor enhancement project. These infiltration bioretention facilities were developed in conjunction with the city’s controlled sewer overflow work as a means to control, clean, and dispense stormwater in an urban environment. The planter boxes receive stormwater runoff from nearby roads and sidewalks which helps provide flooding protection for Michigan Avenue. The vegetation in the planter boxes is designed to remove sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, and other pollutants, as well as reduce water temperature, promote infiltration, evaporation, and transpiration of the stormwater runoff, thereby reducing the overall impact to the Grand River. Michigan Avenue bioretention planter box Source: Tetra Tech, Inc. Case Study Site Considerations Project Type Planter box, rain gardens Estimated Total Project Cost Maintenance Responsibility $500/linear foot City of Lansing, MDOT, MDEQ Project Contact Pat O’Meara, 866-454-3923 LID Manual for Michigan – Chapter 7 Page 258
Description and Function Planter boxes receive runoff from multiple impervious surfaces, including rooftops, sidewalks, and parking lots. Runoff is used for irrigation purposes, and the vegetation in the planter box absorbs stormwater and releases it back into the atmosphere through evapotranspiration. Boxes can take any form and can be made out of a variety of materials, although many are constructed from wood. Construction specifications are critical to ensure that an appropriate volume of runoff from smaller storms “feeds” the carefully selected vegetation types in the boxes; however, consistent watering is necessary during dry periods. In general, planter boxes must be carefully designed to accommodate the desired amount of runoff. In addition, plantings must be carefully selected, and boxes must be carefully maintained, to accomplish stormwater objectives, and perhaps, most importantly, to succeed in a landowner’s overall landscaping objectives. Stormwater benefits of planter boxes include reduction in runoff volumes and some reduction in peak rates of runoff. Boxes which overflow also effectively reduce peak rates of runoff. Depending on the type of box selected, evapotranspiration will increase along with infiltration and groundwater recharge. Water quality may benefit, depending upon how much runoff is directed into the ground and prevented from worsening erosive stream flows. When well designed, installed, and maintained, planter boxes are extremely attractive additions to homes, commercial businesses, and office buildings. In fact, an essential objective in developing planter boxes is to enhance overall landscape aesthetics. Boxes are ideal for buffers around structures, foundation plantings, providing seat walls, and for defining walkways, patios, terraces, drives, and courtyards. Variations Of all the BMPs listed in this manual, planter boxes are probably the most adaptable to all types of sites with all types of site constraints. The infiltration variation is influenced by all factors which are limiting to any infiltration-oriented BMP (i.e., bedrock/seasonal high water table at or close to the surface, very poorly draining soils, etc., all of which are described in the Infiltration BMP of this manual). However, both the contained and flow through variations can be used on virtually every type of site ⎯ large or small, front yard or backyard, flat or sloping, shady or sunny. Contained Contained planter boxes (Figure 7.42) are generally traditional planters that have weep holes to drain excess water from the planter. They effectively reduce impervious area by retaining rainwater which slows stormwater runoff from draining into sewers. Contained planters are used for planting trees, shrubs, perennials, and annuals. The planter is either prefabricated or permanently constructed in a variety of shapes and sizes. Planters are typically placed on impervious surfaces like sidewalks, plazas, and rooftops. Contained planters may drain onto impervious surfaces through their base or into an overflow structure. Figure 7.42 Schematic of Contained Planter Box Growing Medium Top of soil set 2” From top of planter filter fabric Weep Holes for drainage Impervious Surface Source: City of Portland, OR Bureau of Environmental Services LID Manual for Michigan – Chapter 7 Page 259 12’-18’
Page 1:
A Design Guide for Implementers and
Page 4 and 5:
LID Manual for Michigan Page ii
Page 6 and 7:
Shawn Keenan, City of Auburn Hills
Page 8 and 9:
Appendix G: Stormwater Management P
Page 10 and 11:
Figure 7.18 Filter with infiltratio
Page 12 and 13:
Table 7.9 Definitions of Wetland Ve
Page 14 and 15:
How this manual is organized This m
Page 16 and 17:
discuss a new development. The staf
Page 18 and 19:
In a natural woodland or meadow in
Page 20 and 21:
Almost all components of the urban
Page 22 and 23:
Benefits of implementing LID Implem
Page 24 and 25:
Table 2.2 Summary of Cost Compariso
Page 26 and 27:
Getting started with LID LID can be
Page 28 and 29:
Precipitation also varies slightly
Page 30 and 31:
Figure 3.4 Soil Freezing in Lower M
Page 32 and 33:
Figure 3.6 Michigan Surficial Geolo
Page 34 and 35:
Most soils in Michigan are classifi
Page 36 and 37:
Table 3.3 Representative Cation Exc
Page 38 and 39:
There is currently no single broadl
Page 40 and 41:
Wellhead protection areas/ public w
Page 42 and 43:
Table 3.4 Michigan Rivers and Strea
Page 44 and 45:
References * Bailey, R.M and G.R. S
Page 46 and 47:
LID Manual for Michigan - Chapter 3
Page 48 and 49:
Following are sample goals and poli
Page 50 and 51:
Develop regulations that encourage/
Page 52 and 53:
Construction activity • Minimize
Page 54 and 55:
Street sweeping in Bloomfield Towns
Page 56 and 57:
Resistance from internal sources an
Page 58 and 59:
Site constraints that may pose chal
Page 60 and 61:
Entity Stormwater Jurisdiction Coun
Page 62 and 63:
Step 1: Property acquisition and us
Page 64 and 65:
can be incorporated into the develo
Page 66 and 67:
Step 3: Integrate municipal, county
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
BMP Selection Process This chapter
Page 72 and 73:
Case Study: Title The second page o
Page 74 and 75:
Case Study: Pokagon Band of Potawat
Page 76 and 77:
Figure 6.2 Conventional development
Page 78 and 79:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Clu
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Case Study: Minimizing soil compact
Page 84 and 85:
4. Topsoil stockpiling and storage
Page 86 and 87:
References Hanks, D. and Lewandowsk
Page 88 and 89:
Case Study: Longmeadow Development
Page 90 and 91:
Applications Minimizing the total d
Page 92 and 93:
Criteria to Receive Credits for Min
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Case Study: Marywood Health Center
Page 98 and 99:
Design Considerations 1. Identify n
Page 100 and 101:
References Center for Watershed Pro
Page 102 and 103:
Case Study: Macomb County Public Wo
Page 104 and 105:
Zone 3: Also termed the “outer zo
Page 106 and 107:
• Limit clearing and grading of f
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Case Study: Western Michigan Univer
Page 112 and 113:
Protection of sensitive areas in re
Page 114 and 115:
then weightings of potential develo
Page 116 and 117:
Floodplains • Design the project
Page 118 and 119:
References Arendt, Randall G. Growi
Page 120 and 121:
Case Study: Willard Beach Implement
Page 122 and 123:
Table 6.2 Narrow residential street
Page 124 and 125:
Parking Parking lots often comprise
Page 126 and 127:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Red
Page 128 and 129:
Case Study: Saugatuck Center for th
Page 130 and 131:
In addition to directing runoff to
Page 132 and 133:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Dis
Page 134 and 135:
Runoff Volume/ Infiltration Runoff
Page 136 and 137:
Figure 7.1 Structural BMP Selection
Page 138 and 139:
In general, the techniques describe
Page 140 and 141:
Table 7.3 Additional BMP considerat
Page 142 and 143:
Maintenance Provides guidance on re
Page 144 and 145:
Case Study: Grayling Stormwater Pro
Page 146 and 147:
Figure 7.5 illustrates a schematic
Page 148 and 149:
Flow inlet: Curbs and curb cuts Cur
Page 150 and 151:
Roads and highways Figure 7.13 show
Page 152 and 153:
Design Considerations Bioretention
Page 154 and 155:
7. Planting periods will vary but,
Page 156 and 157:
Construction Guidelines The followi
Page 158 and 159:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Rai
Page 160 and 161:
Case Study: Stormwater Capture with
Page 162 and 163:
Ford Rouge Plant cistern Vertical s
Page 164 and 165:
Design Considerations Design and in
Page 166 and 167:
the tank can accommodate.) (www.sta
Page 168 and 169:
References “Black Vertical Storag
Page 170 and 171:
Case Study: Constructed Linear Sand
Page 172 and 173:
Surface non-vegetated filter A surf
Page 174 and 175:
Large subsurface filter Large Subsu
Page 176 and 177:
would modestly increase constructio
Page 178 and 179:
During inspection the following con
Page 180 and 181:
References Atlanta Regional Commiss
Page 182 and 183:
Site Factors Type Basin Bottom Rela
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Variations For this manual, detenti
Page 188 and 189:
Precast concrete vault Source: Amer
Page 190 and 191:
surface into the pond to a maximum
Page 192 and 193:
sink for pollutants and generally h
Page 194 and 195:
The presettlement and post-developm
Page 196 and 197:
wet pond and constructed wetland op
Page 198 and 199:
ackfilling operation should driven
Page 200 and 201:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Dry
Page 202 and 203:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Con
Page 204 and 205:
References AMEC Earth and Environme
Page 206 and 207:
Key Design Features • Depth to wa
Page 208 and 209:
Case Study: Saugatuck Center for th
Page 210 and 211:
Infiltration basins, subsurface inf
Page 212 and 213:
Figure 7.24 Cross-section of dry we
Page 214 and 215:
• The soil mantle should be prese
Page 216 and 217:
Additional design considerations fo
Page 218 and 219:
• Though roofs are generally not
Page 220 and 221: Subsurface infiltration bed Source:
Page 222 and 223: Stormwater Functions and Calculatio
Page 224 and 225: • Protect the infiltration area f
Page 226 and 227: Additional Construction Guidelines
Page 228 and 229: Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Inf
Page 230 and 231: References AMEC Earth and Environme
Page 232 and 233: LID Manual for Michigan - Chapter 7
Page 234 and 235: Case Study: Washtenaw County West S
Page 236 and 237: Design Considerations Level spreade
Page 238 and 239: 3. Inspect the filter strip and the
Page 240 and 241: References Hathaway, Jon and Hunt,
Page 242 and 243: Case Study: Black River Heritage Tr
Page 244 and 245: Figure 7.31 Native meadow species c
Page 246 and 247: Applications • Residential - Nati
Page 248 and 249: 5. Amend soil: In those sites where
Page 250 and 251: Water quality improvement Landscape
Page 252 and 253: References Arendt, R. Growing Green
Page 254 and 255: Case Study: Grand Valley State Univ
Page 256 and 257: Staging, construction practices, an
Page 258 and 259: Reinforced turf/gravel Reinforced t
Page 260 and 261: 4. Pervious pavement and infiltrati
Page 262 and 263: 12. Proper pervious pavement applic
Page 264 and 265: Figure 7.40 Open-graded, clean, coa
Page 266 and 267: Repairs • Surface should never be
Page 268 and 269: References Adams, Michele. “Porou
Page 272 and 273: Native vegetation should be used in
Page 274 and 275: Design Considerations • Suggested
Page 276 and 277: oxes, etc. should be installed in a
Page 278 and 279: References Stormwater Management Gu
Page 280 and 281: Case Study: Nankin Mills Interpreti
Page 282 and 283: Figure 7.45 Schematic of a three-zo
Page 284 and 285: 3. Analyze site’s vegetative feat
Page 286 and 287: Black River Heritage Trail and Wate
Page 288 and 289: Table 7.14 Tree spacing per acre Sp
Page 290 and 291: 4. Stable debris As Zone 1 reaches
Page 292 and 293: References Alliance for the Chesape
Page 294 and 295: Case Study: Ann Arbor District Libr
Page 296 and 297: • Major compaction - Deep compact
Page 298 and 299: e. Add six inches compost or other
Page 300 and 301: References “Achieving the Post-Co
Page 302 and 303: Case Study: Wayne County, MI Ford R
Page 304 and 305: slope needs to be determined. This
Page 306 and 307: Figure 7.52 Sandy soils with HSG Gr
Page 308 and 309: Figure 7.56 Clay Loam, Silty Clay o
Page 310 and 311: • Guidance information, usually i
Page 312 and 313: LID Manual for Michigan - Chapter 7
Page 314 and 315: Case Study: City of Battle Creek Ci
Page 316 and 317: Table 7.16 Vegetated roof types Ext
Page 318 and 319: Dual media assemblies Dual media (F
Page 320 and 321:
Over a period of time roots can dam
Page 322 and 323:
Technical requirements Root resista
Page 324 and 325:
Stormwater Functions and Calculatio
Page 326 and 327:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Veg
Page 328 and 329:
Case Study: Meadowlake Farms Bioswa
Page 330 and 331:
lower flows (two-year storm) to dra
Page 332 and 333:
Stone check dams Source: Road Commi
Page 334 and 335:
Table 7.18 Permanent stabilization
Page 336 and 337:
Peak rate mitigation Vegetated swal
Page 338 and 339:
Designer/Reviewer Checklist for Veg
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Case Study: LaVista Storm Drain Pro
Page 344 and 345:
Basket type inserts Basket type ins
Page 346 and 347:
Maintenance is crucial to the effec
Page 348 and 349:
Roadway design, construction, and m
Page 350 and 351:
• Vegetated systems such as grass
Page 352 and 353:
Of the options explored, the study
Page 354 and 355:
Figure 8.3 Tree planting detail Sou
Page 356 and 357:
Opportunities for MPOs Metropolitan
Page 358 and 359:
Construction on the project began i
Page 360 and 361:
The following are examples of imple
Page 362 and 363:
Horizontal grates can be added to a
Page 364 and 365:
East Hills Center City of Grand Rap
Page 366 and 367:
Implementing LID in High Risk Areas
Page 368 and 369:
References AASHTO Center for Enviro
Page 370 and 371:
LID Design Criteria Defining the hy
Page 372 and 373:
Flood control Flood control is base
Page 374 and 375:
Table 9.1 90 Percent Nonexceedance
Page 376 and 377:
Initial abstraction (I a ) includes
Page 378 and 379:
The Curve Number Method is less acc
Page 380 and 381:
I = the average rainfall intensity
Page 382 and 383:
Table 9.4 Rainfall Events of 24-Hou
Page 384 and 385:
• Proceed to Flow Chart B, Peak R
Page 386 and 387:
FLOW CHART A Stormwater Calculation
Page 388 and 389:
Excessively drained soils may requi
Page 390 and 391:
Worksheet 2. Sensitive Natural Reso
Page 392 and 393:
WORKSHEET 4. Calculations for Volum
Page 394 and 395:
WORKSHEET 6. SMALL SITE / SMALL IMP
Page 396 and 397:
WORKSHEET 8. WATER QUALITY WORKSHEE
Page 398 and 399:
Reese, S. and J. Lee. “Summary of
Page 400 and 401:
ing Department. Most maintenance co
Page 402 and 403:
The Hydrotech Garden Roof Assembly
Page 404 and 405:
Bioswales provide infiltration of s
Page 406 and 407:
The Ingham County Drain Commissione
Page 408 and 409:
Constructed wetland The lowest port
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412 and 413:
LID Manual for Michigan - Appendix
Page 414 and 415:
Check dam Cistern Clustering Combin
Page 416 and 417:
H:V Horizontal to vertical ratio. H
Page 418 and 419:
Planter box Pervious pavement Phase
Page 420 and 421:
Total phosphorous (TP) The total am
Page 422 and 423:
Ecoregion recommendations are also
Page 424 and 425:
Zone A Planting Zone = two-to-four
Page 426 and 427:
Zone C Planting Zone = zero-to-two
Page 428 and 429:
Representative Zone C Species Cardi
Page 430 and 431:
Botanical Name Common Name Height C
Page 432 and 433:
Zone E Planting Zone = four-to-18 i
Page 434 and 435:
Representative Zone E Species Tall
Page 436 and 437:
Botanical Name Common Name Height C
Page 438 and 439:
Zone G Planter Box Plantings Althou
Page 440 and 441:
Zone H Vegetated Roof Plantings Res
Page 442 and 443:
Page 444 and 445:
Pervious Berms (Vegetated Filter St
Page 446 and 447:
Vegetated roofs Some key components
Page 448 and 449:
Page 450 and 451:
Step 1. Background evaluation Prior
Page 452 and 453:
Methodology for double-ring infiltr
Page 454 and 455:
Step 4. Use design considerations p
Page 456 and 457:
Page 458 and 459:
Detention BMP Inspection Checklist*
Page 460 and 461:
Infiltration BMPs Inspection Checkl
Page 462 and 463:
Bioretention Inspection Checklist*
Page 464 and 465:
Bioswale, Filter Strip Inspection C
Page 466 and 467:
Page 468 and 469:
6. The [Community] or its designee
Page 470 and 471:
STATE OF MICHIGAN ) ) ss. COUNTY OF
Page 472 and 473:
Exhibit B - Location Map (Sample) S
Page 474 and 475:
Page 476 and 477:
Page 478 and 479:
Page 480 and 481:
Page 482 and 483:
Page 484 and 485:
Page 486 and 487:
Page 488 and 489:
Page 490 and 491:
• Stormwater runoff, soil erosion
Page 492 and 493:
Retention. A holding system for sto
Page 494 and 495:
ARTICLE IV. STORMWATER PLAN REQUIRE
Page 496 and 497:
The particular facilities and measu
Page 498 and 499:
10. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the
Page 500 and 501:
Table H.2 Pre-Treatment Options for
Page 502 and 503:
f. Complete development agreements
Page 504 and 505:
must be submitted to the Michigan D
Page 506 and 507:
C. Construction Plans shall be revi
Page 508 and 509:
fine for each day. The rights and r
Page 512:
Southeast Michigan Council of Gover
show all

Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan - OSEH - University ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?