A review of the bioretention system for sustainable storm water management in urban areas

Open access


Bioretention basins/rain garden is a very suitable low-impact development (LID) practice for storm water management around the globe. By using this practice in urban areas, flash flooding problems can be decreased and the environment of an area can be improved. The concept of bioretention was introduced a few decades ago and has been proven to be the best management practice (BMP) for storm water in urban areas. Due to urbanisation, natural surface areas are converted into hard surfaces such as roads, through which water cannot infiltrate into the ground. Due to this, infiltration decreases and surface run-off increases, which causes depletion of ground water continuously. In this study, we mainly explain the bioretention concept and its function as derived from different studies. This review includes different scientists’ results for the performance of the bioretention system at different locations. A summary of the research findings by different scientists on the performance of bioretention systems is also provided, including the hydrologic and water quality performances. Finally, future work necessary to enhance the performance and widespread use of bioretention systems is also explained.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] The Economist Open-air Computers: Cities are Turning into Vast Data Factories. Available online: http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21564998-cities-are-turning-vast-datafactories-open-air-computers (accessed on 13 April 2014).

  • [2] UN News Center Half of Global Population Will Live in Cities by End of This Year Predicts UN. Available online: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=25762 (accessed on 13 April 2014).

  • [3] Fletcher T.D. Andrieu H. Hamel P. (2013): Understanding management and modelling of urban hydrology and its consequences for receiving waters: A state of the art. Adv. Water Resour; 51 261–279.

  • [4] National Research Council. 2009. Urban storm water management in the United States The National Academies Washington D.C.

  • [5] Kaushal S.S. Belt K.T. (2012): The urban watershed continuum: Evolving spatial and temporal dimensions. Urban Ecosyst; 15 409–435.

  • [6] Nelson E.J. Booth D.B. (2002): Sediment sources in an urbanizing mixed land-use watershed. J. Hydrol; 264 51–68.

  • [7] Carey R.O. Hochmuth G.J. Martinez C.J. Boyer T. H. Dukes M.D. Toor G.S. Cisar J.L. (2013): Evaluating nutrient impacts in urban watersheds: Challenges and research opportunities. Environ. Pollut; 173 138–149.

  • [8] U.S. Enviornmental Protection Agency Washington D.C. (2003): “Protenting Water quality from Urban Runoff.” Document No. EPA 841-F-03-003. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Natural_%26_impervious_cover_diagrams_EPA.jpg. (accessed on 13 July 2016).

  • [9] Prince George’s County. Low-Impact Development Design Strategies An Integrated Design Approach; Department of Environmental Resources Programs and Planning Division: Largo MD USA 2000.

  • [10] PGC (Prince George’s County Maryland). Bioretention manual. Maryland: Department of Environmental Resources Prince George’s County 2007. http://www.aacounty.org/DPW/Highways/Resources/Raingarden/RG_Bioretention_PG%20CO.pdf.

  • [11] Hunt W. Smith J. Jadlocki S. Hathaway J. Eubanks P. (2008): Pollutant removal and peak flow mitigation by a bioretention cell in urban Charlotte N.C. J. Environ. Eng; 134 403–408.

  • [12] Dietz M. (2007): Low impact development practices: A review of current research and recommendations for future directions Water Air Soil Pollut.; 186 351–363.

  • [13] US Environmental Protection Agency (2012): Benefits of Low Impact Development: How LID can Protect Your Community’s Resources; Office of Wetlands Oceans and Watersheds: Washington DC USA.

  • [14] DeBusk K. Hunt W. Line D. (2011): Bioretention outflow: Does it mimic nonurban watershed shallow interflow? J. Hydrol. Eng.; 16 274–279.

  • [15] Davis A.P. (2008): Field performance of bioretention: Hydrology impacts. J. Hydrol. Eng; 13 90–95.

  • [16] Brown R.A. Hunt W.F. (2012): Improving bioretention/biofiltration performance with restorative maintenance. Water Sci. Technol; 65 361–367.

  • [17] Li H. Davis A.P. (2008): Urban particle capture in bioretention media. I: Laboratory and field studies. J. Environ. Eng.; 134 409–418.

  • [18] USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). Stormwater technology fact sheet. Bioretention. Washington D.C: Office of Water; 1999. EPA 832-F-99-012.

  • [19] Chapman C Horner R.R. (2010): Performance assessment of a street-drainage bioretention system. Water Environ Res.; 82(2):109–119. DOI: 10.2175/106143009´426112.

  • [20] DeBusk K.M. Wynn T.M. (2011): Storm-water bioretention for runoff quality and quantity mitigation. J Environ Eng.; 137(9): 800–808. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000388.

  • [21] Davis A.P. Hunt W. Traver R. Clar M. (2009): Bioretention technology: Overview of current practice and future needs. J. Environ. Eng.; 135 109–117.

  • [22] Davis A.P. Shokouhian M. Sharma H. and Minami C. (2006): Water quality improvement through bioretention media: Nitrogen and phosphorus removal. Water Environ. Res.; 78(3) 284–293.

  • [23] Hunt W.F. Jarrett A.R. Smith J.T. and Sharkey L.J. (2006): Evaluating bioretention hydrology and nutrient removal at three field sites in North Carolina. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.; 132(6) 600–608.

  • [24] Henderson C. Greenway M. and Phillips I. (2007): Removal of dissolved nitrogen phosphorus and carbon rom storm water by biofiltration mesocosms. Water Sci. Technol.; 55(4) 183–191.

  • [25] Hsieh C. Davis A.P. and Needelman B.A. (2007b): Bioretention column studies of phosphorus removal from urban storm water runoff. Water Environ. Res.; 79(2) 177–184.

  • [26] Zhang W. Brown G.O. Storm D.E. and Zhang H. (2008):. Fly-ashamended sand as filter media in bioretention cells to improve phosphorus removal. Water Environ. Res.; 80(6) 507–516.

  • [27] Davis A.P. (2007): Field performance of bioretention: Water quality. Environ. Eng. Sci.; 24 1048–1064.

  • [28] Hunt W. Jarrett A. Smith J. Sharkey L. (2006): Evaluating Bioretention hydrology and nutrient removal at three field sites in North Carolina. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.; 132 600–608.

  • [29] Kumar R. Martell S.J. Pitcher T.J. Varkey D.A. (2013): Temperature-driven decline of a cisco population in Mille Lacs Lake Minnesota. North Am. J. Fish. Manag; 33 669–681.

  • [30] Roseen R. Ballestero T. Houle J. Avellaneda P. Briggs J. Fowler G. Wildey R. (2009):Seasonal performance variations for storm-water management systems in cold climate conditions. J. Environ. Eng; 135 128–137.

  • [31] Long D.L. Dymond R.L. (2013): Thermal pollution mitigation in cold water stream watersheds using Bioretention. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc doi:10.1111/jawr.12152.

  • [32] Cosgrove J.F.J. and Bergstrom J.D. (2004): Design and construction of biofiltration basins: Lessons learned. Proc. 2003 World Water and Environmental Resources Congress ASCE Reston Va. 323.

  • [33] Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (2008): Performance evaluation of permeable pavement and a bioretention swale—Seneca College King City Ontario Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Toronto.

  • [34] Morzaria-Luna H.N. Schaepe K.S. Cutforth L.B. and Veltman R.L. (2004): Implementation of bioretention systems: A Wisconsin case study. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc.; 40(4) 1053–1061.

Journal information
Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 860 511 7
PDF Downloads 267 175 5