Difference between revisions of "Constrained spaces"
Tvanseters (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
*[[Green roofs]], | *[[Green roofs]], | ||
*[[Stormwater planters]], | *[[Stormwater planters]], | ||
| − | *[[Permeable | + | *[[Permeable pavements]], |
*[[Absorbent landscapes]], | *[[Absorbent landscapes]], | ||
*[[Swales]], | *[[Swales]], | ||
Latest revision as of 18:34, 6 August 2020
There are so many opportunities to get creative in fitting LID practices into tight spaces, or to integrate them onto/into buildings! Space efficient BMPs include:
- Green roofs,
- Stormwater planters,
- Permeable pavements,
- Absorbent landscapes,
- Swales,
- Rainwater harvesting,
- Blue roofs,
- Micro constructed wetlands[1],
- Dry ponds, and
- Soil cells.
In many cases it may be possible to include infiltrating practices within 'normal' setbacks too[2]. This will depend upon the native soil type, the depth of the water table, and the underdrain configuration being designed to prevent mounding of the groundwater. See also groundwater mounding.
Building integrated vegetation[edit]
Shallowly planted green walls as seen in Asian, European or West Coast climates have some trouble surviving in Ontario. However, planter boxes can be incorporated into the facades and the relatively small catchments of roof decks and balconies can be routed to irrigate them. These can house deciduous trees, shrubs or climbing plants to provide shading to the building envelope as well as capturing stormwater.
- ↑ AECOM, Water. People. Places. A guide for master planning sustainable drainage into developments (2013) https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/2270/suds_design_guidance.pdf
- ↑ Wilson, S. (2012). “Using SuDS close to buildings.” <https://www.susdrain.org/files/resources/fact_sheets/09_12_fact_sheet_suds_close_to_buildings.pdf> (Mar. 8, 2018).