Line 1: |
Line 1: |
− | '''<h3>LID opportunities in parks</h3>''' [[File:Example.jpg|thumb|upright=0.6|The bioretention area installed at O’Connor Park
| + | #REDIRECT [[LID opportunities on public land]] |
− | in Mississauga is part of a stormwater management system
| |
− | that treats parking lot runoff prior to discharging to a local
| |
− | wetland. (Source: CVC)]]
| |
− | | |
− | Parks range from simple parcels of municipal property to
| |
− | complex outdoor recreational facilities that include parking,
| |
− | sidewalks, trails, sports fields, field houses, operations
| |
− | facilities, and washrooms. Each distinct area of your site can
| |
− | be a source for runoff (referred to as a ‘source area’). These
| |
− | areas should be targeted when introducing LID in your park.
| |
− | <br><br>
| |
− | '''<h4>Targeting hard surfaces</h4>'''
| |
− | Hard surfaces like parking lots and internal driveways are the
| |
− | most obvious areas to target for both stormwater quality and
| |
− | water balance improvements. These features produce more
| |
− | runoff than any other area on your site. Water quality of runoff
| |
− | from parking lots and driveways is typically more polluted
| |
− | than other source areas. Common water quality concerns
| |
− | include sand and salt from winter de-icing operations, and
| |
− | hydrocarbons (gasoline) and metals from vehicle breakdowns
| |
− | Runoff from vegetated areas of parks will be relatively
| |
− | clean and more closely match the natural water balance.
| |
− | On municipal park properties, hard surfaces are usually
| |
− | located adjacent to pervious areas such as lawns, gardens or naturalized areas. This makes an ideal location for a LID
| |
− | retrofit. Where grading allows, you can construct bioswales
| |
− | and bioretention areas in these green areas to pre-treat water
| |
− | prior to infiltration.
| |
− | You can also design parking surfaces and internal roadways
| |
− | as infiltration systems using permeable pavement. This retrofit
| |
− | strategy can be combined with other LID practices.
| |
− | A pedestrian pathway paved with permeable pavement
| |
− | is another LID option for your park. They will reduce runoff
| |
− | volumes and encourage on-site infiltration. Pervious pipes
| |
− | are a viable option on many parks sites as well. They can be
| |
− | an alternative to conventional conveyance systems such as
| |
− | storm sewers. They encourage infiltration from hard surfaces
| |
− | and can be used to convey water to other LID features.
| |
− | <br> <br>
| |
− | '''<h4>Accepting drainage from off-site areas</h4>''' [[File:Example1.jpg|thumb|upright=0.6|Urban parkettes may look small, but they have
| |
− | the potential to treat a large surface area of road. Typical ratios
| |
− | of impervious drainage area to bioretention range from 5:1 to
| |
− | 15:1. (Source: CVC)]]
| |
− | | |
− | Does municipally owned land drain into your retrofit site? If
| |
− | so, this is an opportunity to provide stormwater controls for
| |
− | these areas.
| |
− | Roads are the most common source of runoff from external
| |
− | properties into parks. Treating municipal road runoff in a park
| |
− | requires planning input from municipal roads department
| |
− | staff. For these projects, the team must understand how all
| |
− | roads activities, including winter maintenance and potential
| |
− | roadwork, will affect the operation of LID practices in the park.
| |
− | <br><br>
| |
− | '''<h3>Inter-municipal transfer of funds</h3>''' Integrating LID practices into the municipal stormwater
| |
− | management framework may change how municipal funds are
| |
− | managed. Traditional stormwater management maintenance
| |
− | resources and funds may have to be transferred to a more landscape-based stormwater management maintenance program. Instead of infrequent but expensive stormwater management pond sediment removal operations, time and
| |
− | resources will be spent on more frequent but inexpensive maintenance projects including pruning and weeding bioretention practices or sweeping permeable pavement.
| |
− | Municipalities generally have the required staff and infrastructure within departments (e.g. arborist and horticulturalists in parks departments) to manage the maintenance of LID measures; however, funding this maintenance may require a transfer of funding and additional
| |
− | training.
| |
− | The federal Gas Tax Fund (GTF) is another funding option for
| |
− | funding LID retrofits. This is a federal transfer that provides
| |
− | long term funding for municipalities to build and revitalize
| |
− | public infrastructure. Up to 30% of municipalities yearly GTF
| |
− | allotment can be used towards stormwater management.
| |
− | <br><br>
| |
− | | |
− | '''<h3>Source Areas</h3>''' [[File:Example3.jpg|thumb|upright=0.6|The road surface (left) contributes significantly
| |
− | more stormwater pollutants than the parkland area (right). To
| |
− | achieve maximum watershed benefit a designer could consider
| |
− | accepting runoff from this external area. (Source: CVC)]]
| |
− | The LID option that best fits your site will depend what types
| |
− | of source areas are present. Types of source areas include:
| |
− | • Active use area
| |
− | • Passive use area
| |
− | • Pedestrian walkway
| |
− | • Internal driveway
| |
− | • Parking lot
| |
− | On park sites, pollution prevention is often associated with
| |
− | changes to operations and maintenance practices and has
| |
− | not been included in Table 3.3.1. An aerial photo of a park
| |
− | with each of these source areas accompanies Table 3.3.1.
| |
− | Options and implementation strategies for a few of these
| |
− | source areas will give you some ideas for your park site.
| |
− | {| class="wikitable"
| |
− | |colspan="9" style="text-align: center;|'''[[LID Options for Parks]]'''
| |
− | |-
| |
− | | Source area || Permeable pavement || Bioretention || Enhanced grassed swales || Bioswales || Soakaways and infiltration chambers || Perforated pipe system || Landscape alternatives || Prefabricated modules
| |
− | |-
| |
− | | Active use area ||style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| o || style="text-align: center;|* || style="text-align: center;|* || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|* ||style="text-align: center;| o ||style="text-align: center;| o
| |
− | |-
| |
− | | Passive use area ||style="text-align: center;| o || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| ** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| ** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| **
| |
− | |-style="text-align: center;|
| |
− | | Pedestrian walkway || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| ** || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| * || style="text-align: center;|* || style="text-align: center;|o
| |
− | |-
| |
− | | Internal driveway || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| ** || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| ** || style="text-align: center;|o ||style="text-align: center;| *
| |
− | |-
| |
− | | Parking lot ||style="text-align: center;| ** || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** || style="text-align: center;|** ||style="text-align: center;| o || style="text-align: center;|**
| |
− | | |
− | |-
| |
− | !colspan="3" style="background:cyan; color:black"| '''** Common option'''
| |
− | !colspan="3" style="background: orange; color: black"|'''* Possible option'''
| |
− | !colspan="3" style="background: brown; color: white"|'''o Unlikely'''
| |
− | |}
| |