Tables: Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Back to source | Source PDF | Structured table records
Table fragments retain their source context. Refer to the original page for layout, figures, merged headings and notes.
1. Table 1
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 1
| N.J.A.C. 7:8 Stormwater Management Rules – Applicable Design and Performance Standards |
|
|
|
Green Infrastructure |
Yes |
|
Stormwater Runoff Quantity |
Yes, when designed as an on-line system |
| K2B |
Groundwater Recharge |
Yes, for systems designed to infiltrate into the subsoil |
| % |
Stormwater Runoff Quality |
80 - 90% TSS Removal, depending on vegetation selection and depth of the soil bed |
| Water Quality Mechanisms and Corresponding Criteria |
|
|
| --- |
--- |
|
| Settling |
|
|
| Minimum Storage Volume |
Entire Water Quality Design Storm Volume |
|
| Vegetative Uptake and Filtration |
|
|
| Minimum Density of Vegetation |
85% |
|
| Appropriate Species Selection |
See Page 5 and Chapter 7: Landscaping |
|
| Depth of Soil Bed |
1.5 - 2 feet, See Page 5 |
|
| Infiltration |
|
|
| Maximum Contributory Drainage Area |
2.5 acres |
|
| Maximum Design Storm Drain Time |
72 hours, Using Slowest Design Permeability Rate |
|
| Permeability Rate Factor of Safety |
2 |
|
| Minimum Subsoil Design Permeability Rate |
0.5 inches/hour, tested in accordance with Chapter 12: Soil Testing Criteria |
|
Source context and notes
Source revision: March 2021.
# 9.7 SMALL-SCALE BIORETENTION SYSTEMS
[Figure: img-0.jpeg (original PDF, p. 1)](SOURCE.pdf#page=1)
Small-scale bioretention systems are stormwater management facilities used to address the stormwater quality and quantity impacts of land development. The system consists of a soil bed planted with vegetation; it can be underdrained, or runoff can infiltrate into the subsoil. Pollutants are treated through the processes of settling, plus uptake and filtration by the vegetation. Pollutants are also treated within the soil bed through infiltration. The total suspended solids (TSS) removal rate is 80 - 90%; this rate will depend on the depth of the soil bed and the type of vegetation selected.
| N.J.A.C. 7:8 Stormwater Management Rules – Applicable Design and Performance Standards | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Green Infrastructure | Yes |
| | Stormwater Runoff Quantity | Yes, when designed as an on-line system |
| K2B | Groundwater Recharge | Yes, for systems designed to infiltrate into the subsoil |
| % | Stormwater Runoff Quality | 80 - 90% TSS Removal, depending on vegetation selection and depth of the soil bed |
| Water Quality Mechanisms and Corresponding Criteria | |
| --- | --- |
| Settling | |
| Minimum Storage Volume | Entire Water Quality Design Storm Volume |
| Vegetative Uptake and Filtration | |
| Minimum Density of Vegetation | 85% |
| Appropriate Species Selection | See Page 5 and Chapter 7: Landscaping |
| Depth of Soil Bed | 1.5 - 2 feet, See Page 5 |
| Infiltration | |
| Maximum Contributory Drainage Area | 2.5 acres |
| Maximum Design Storm Drain Time | 72 hours, Using Slowest Design Permeability Rate |
| Permeability Rate Factor of Safety | 2 |
| Minimum Subsoil Design Permeability Rate | 0.5 inches/hour, tested in accordance with Chapter 12: Soil Testing Criteria |
2. Table 2
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 5
| Desired TSS Removal Rate |
Design Parameters |
|
|
Minimum Depth of Soil Bed |
Small-scale Bioretention Vegetation |
| 80% |
18 Inches |
Terrestrial Forested Community |
| 80% |
24 inches |
Site-Tolerant Grasses |
| 90% |
24 inches |
Terrestrial Forested Community |
Source context and notes
[Figure: img-9.jpeg (original PDF, p. 5)](SOURCE.pdf#page=5)
Only small-scale bioretention systems designed to infiltrate into the subsoil may be used to meet the groundwater recharge requirements. If designed with an underdrain, a small-scale bioretention system cannot be used to meet these requirements. For more information on computing groundwater recharge, see Chapter 6: Groundwater Recharge.
[Figure: img-10.jpeg (original PDF, p. 5)](SOURCE.pdf#page=5)
The depth of the soil bed and the type of vegetation determine the TSS removal rate, as shown in the table below. To merit the approved TSS removal rate of 80%, small-scale bioretention systems must be designed to treat the Water Quality Design Storm and in accordance with all of the following criteria.
| Desired TSS Removal Rate | Design Parameters | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Minimum Depth of Soil Bed | Small-scale Bioretention Vegetation |
| 80% | 18 Inches | Terrestrial Forested Community |
| 80% | 24 inches | Site-Tolerant Grasses |
| 90% | 24 inches | Terrestrial Forested Community |
3. Table 3
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 16
| Soil Type |
Total Porosity (cf/cf) |
Field Capacity (cf/cf) |
Wilting Point (cf/cf) |
Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) |
Effective Porosity (cf/cf) |
| Sand |
0.437 |
0.062 |
0.024 |
0.038 |
0.375 |
| Loamy Sand |
0.437 |
0.105 |
0.047 |
0.058 |
0.332 |
| Sandy Loam |
0.453 |
0.190 |
0.085 |
0.105 |
0.263 |
| Loam |
0.463 |
0.232 |
0.116 |
0.116 |
0.231 |
| Silt Loam |
0.501 |
0.284 |
0.135 |
0.149 |
0.217 |
| Sandy Clay Loam |
0.398 |
0.244 |
0.136 |
0.108 |
0.154 |
| Clay Loam |
0.464 |
0.310 |
0.187 |
0.123 |
0.154 |
| Silty Clay Loam |
0.471 |
0.342 |
0.210 |
0.132 |
0.129 |
| Sandy Clay |
0.430 |
0.321 |
0.221 |
0.100 |
0.109 |
| Silty Clay |
0.479 |
0.371 |
0.251 |
0.120 |
0.108 |
| Clay |
0.475 |
0.378 |
0.265 |
0.113 |
0.097 |
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
Soil Parameters for Small-Scale Bioretention Systems Designed with an Underdrain
| Soil Type | Total Porosity (cf/cf) | Field Capacity (cf/cf) | Wilting Point (cf/cf) | Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) | Effective Porosity (cf/cf) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sand | 0.437 | 0.062 | 0.024 | 0.038 | 0.375 |
| Loamy Sand | 0.437 | 0.105 | 0.047 | 0.058 | 0.332 |
| Sandy Loam | 0.453 | 0.190 | 0.085 | 0.105 | 0.263 |
| Loam | 0.463 | 0.232 | 0.116 | 0.116 | 0.231 |
| Silt Loam | 0.501 | 0.284 | 0.135 | 0.149 | 0.217 |
| Sandy Clay Loam | 0.398 | 0.244 | 0.136 | 0.108 | 0.154 |
| Clay Loam | 0.464 | 0.310 | 0.187 | 0.123 | 0.154 |
| Silty Clay Loam | 0.471 | 0.342 | 0.210 | 0.132 | 0.129 |
| Sandy Clay | 0.430 | 0.321 | 0.221 | 0.100 | 0.109 |
| Silty Clay | 0.479 | 0.371 | 0.251 | 0.120 | 0.108 |
| Clay | 0.475 | 0.378 | 0.265 | 0.113 | 0.097 |
4. Table 4
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 23
| Soil Bed Depth = |
18 in (21.7% effective porosity for silt loam) |
| Assumed Design Permeability of Soil bed |
1 in/hr |
| Sand layer = |
6 in (37.5% effective porosity) |
| Gravel layer = |
12 in (40% effective porosity) |
Source context and notes
## Step 1: Runoff Calculations
Using the NRCS method described in National Engineering Handbook, Part 630 (NEH) and discussed in Chapter 5: Stormwater Runoff Water Quantity Standards and Computations, the volume of runoff produced by the WQDS was calculated to be 660 cf, based upon an NRCS Curve Number (CN) of 98 for impervious surfaces.
## Step 2: Sizing of the Planter Boxes
### a. General Capacity Calculation
| Soil Bed Depth = | 18 in (21.7% effective porosity for silt loam) |
| --- | --- |
| Assumed Design Permeability of Soil bed | 1 in/hr |
| Sand layer = | 6 in (37.5% effective porosity) |
| Gravel layer = | 12 in (40% effective porosity) |
The depth of runoff above the surface of the soil bed is 12 in. Each planter box is designed to be of uniform length and 5 ft wide. The storage volume provided by a planter box measuring internally 1 ft in length is calculated as follows:
5. Table 5
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 24
| Storage Layer |
Depth (ft) |
Width (ft) |
Volume (cf) |
Effective Volume (Effective Porosity x Volume) (cf) |
| Surface |
1 |
5 |
5.0 |
100% x 5.0 = 5.0 |
| Soil Bed |
1.5 |
5 |
7.5 |
21.7% x 7.5 = 1.62 |
| Sand |
0.5 |
5 |
2.5 |
37.5% x 2.5 = 0.94 |
| Gravel |
1.0 |
5 |
5.0 |
40% x 5.0 = 2 |
| Effective Volume for 1-foot long Planter Box = |
|
|
|
9.56 cf |
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
| Storage Layer | Depth (ft) | Width (ft) | Volume (cf) | Effective Volume (Effective Porosity x Volume) (cf) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Surface | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 100% x 5.0 = 5.0 |
| Soil Bed | 1.5 | 5 | 7.5 | 21.7% x 7.5 = 1.62 |
| Sand | 0.5 | 5 | 2.5 | 37.5% x 2.5 = 0.94 |
| Gravel | 1.0 | 5 | 5.0 | 40% x 5.0 = 2 |
| Effective Volume for 1-foot long Planter Box = | | | | 9.56 cf |
The required total length, $L$, of planter boxes, measured in ft, required to provide sufficient storage volume is calculated as:
$$
(9.56 \times L) \text{ cf} \geq 660 \text{ cf}, \text{ which simplifies to } L = 69.03 \text{ ft}
$$
Instead of one long box, a total of 12 planter boxes, each 6 ft in internal length would meet our needs. Each downspout will direct runoff to 3 planter boxes.
6. Table 6
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 26
| Layer |
Field Capacity (cf/cf) |
Wilting Point (cf/cf) |
Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) |
| Soil Bed (Silt Loam) |
0.284 |
0.135 |
0.149 |
| Sand |
0.062 |
0.024 |
0.038 |
| Gravel |
0.02 |
- |
0.02 |
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
| Layer | Field Capacity (cf/cf) | Wilting Point (cf/cf) | Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Soil Bed (Silt Loam) | 0.284 | 0.135 | 0.149 |
| Sand | 0.062 | 0.024 | 0.038 |
| Gravel | 0.02 | - | 0.02 |
A factor of safety of 0.5 is applied to the available water capacity of the soil and sand. Therefore, the volume reduction provided by the planter boxes can be calculated from the product of the volume of the layers and the available water capacity. The result is shown below:
| Layer | Layer Volume (= # of Units x L x W x D) (cf) | Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) | Runoff Retention Volume (cf) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Soil Bed | 12 x 6 x 5 x 1.5 = 540 | 0.149 x 0.5 = 0.0745 | 40.23 |
| Sand | 12 x 6 x 5 x 0.5 = 180 | 0.038 x 0.5 = 0.019 | 3.42 |
| Gravel | 12 x 6 x 5 x 1 = 360 | 0.02 | 7.2 |
| Total = | | | 50.85 |
Therefore, the average volume reduction provided by the system is approximately 50.85 cf. This volume is subtracted from the 660 cf of runoff shown above to determine the volume of runoff leaving the site. This means that 609.15 cf of runoff would leave the site in this example.
7. Table 7
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 26
| Layer |
Layer Volume (= # of Units x L x W x D) (cf) |
Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) |
Runoff Retention Volume (cf) |
| Soil Bed |
12 x 6 x 5 x 1.5 = 540 |
0.149 x 0.5 = 0.0745 |
40.23 |
| Sand |
12 x 6 x 5 x 0.5 = 180 |
0.038 x 0.5 = 0.019 |
3.42 |
| Gravel |
12 x 6 x 5 x 1 = 360 |
0.02 |
7.2 |
| Total = |
|
|
50.85 |
Source context and notes
| Layer | Field Capacity (cf/cf) | Wilting Point (cf/cf) | Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Soil Bed (Silt Loam) | 0.284 | 0.135 | 0.149 |
| Sand | 0.062 | 0.024 | 0.038 |
| Gravel | 0.02 | - | 0.02 |
A factor of safety of 0.5 is applied to the available water capacity of the soil and sand. Therefore, the volume reduction provided by the planter boxes can be calculated from the product of the volume of the layers and the available water capacity. The result is shown below:
| Layer | Layer Volume (= # of Units x L x W x D) (cf) | Available Water Capacity (cf/cf) | Runoff Retention Volume (cf) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Soil Bed | 12 x 6 x 5 x 1.5 = 540 | 0.149 x 0.5 = 0.0745 | 40.23 |
| Sand | 12 x 6 x 5 x 0.5 = 180 | 0.038 x 0.5 = 0.019 | 3.42 |
| Gravel | 12 x 6 x 5 x 1 = 360 | 0.02 | 7.2 |
| Total = | | | 50.85 |
Therefore, the average volume reduction provided by the system is approximately 50.85 cf. This volume is subtracted from the 660 cf of runoff shown above to determine the volume of runoff leaving the site. This means that 609.15 cf of runoff would leave the site in this example.
Illustrations of the planter box system are found below and on the following page.
[Figure: img-20.jpeg (original PDF, p. 26)](SOURCE.pdf#page=26)
Example 1 - Plan View
8. Table 8
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 30
| Inflow Area = 10,890 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.03" for WQ event |
|
|
|
|
| Inflow = 0.73 cfs @ 1.11 hrs, Volume= 939 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 0.66 hrs, Volume= 939 cf, Atten= 95%, Lag= 0.0 min |
|
|
|
|
| Discarded = 0.04 cfs @ 0.66 hrs, Volume= 939 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs |
|
|
|
|
| Peak Elev= 0.85' @ 1.86 hrs Surf.Area= 1,252 sf Storage= 727 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Plug-Flow detention time= 158.0 min calculated for 939 cf (100% of inflow) |
|
|
|
|
| Center-of-Mass det. time= 158.0 min (228.3 - 70.3) |
|
|
|
|
| Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description |
|
|
|
|
| #1 0.00' 1,744 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) |
|
|
|
|
| Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cumulative |
|
|
|
|
| (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) |
|
|
|
|
| 0.00 |
465 |
0 |
0 |
|
| 1.00 |
1,395 |
930 |
930 |
|
| 1.50 |
1,860 |
814 |
1,744 |
|
| Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices |
|
|
|
|
| #1 Discarded 0.00' 0.04 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations |
|
|
|
|
| #2 Primary 0.85' 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads |
|
|
|
|
| Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 0.66 hrs HW=0.02' (Free Discharge) |
|
|
|
|
| +1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) |
|
|
|
|
| Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=0.00' (Free Discharge) |
|
|
|
|
| +2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) |
|
|
|
|
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
WQDS Summary Report
| Inflow Area = 10,890 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.03" for WQ event | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Inflow = 0.73 cfs @ 1.11 hrs, Volume= 939 cf | | | | |
| Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 0.66 hrs, Volume= 939 cf, Atten= 95%, Lag= 0.0 min | | | | |
| Discarded = 0.04 cfs @ 0.66 hrs, Volume= 939 cf | | | | |
| Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf | | | | |
| Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs | | | | |
| Peak Elev= 0.85' @ 1.86 hrs Surf.Area= 1,252 sf Storage= 727 cf | | | | |
| Plug-Flow detention time= 158.0 min calculated for 939 cf (100% of inflow) | | | | |
| Center-of-Mass det. time= 158.0 min (228.3 - 70.3) | | | | |
| Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description | | | | |
| #1 0.00' 1,744 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) | | | | |
| Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cumulative | | | | |
| (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) | | | | |
| 0.00 | 465 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1.00 | 1,395 | 930 | 930 | |
| 1.50 | 1,860 | 814 | 1,744 | |
| Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices | | | | |
| #1 Discarded 0.00' 0.04 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations | | | | |
| #2 Primary 0.85' 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads | | | | |
| Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 0.66 hrs HW=0.02' (Free Discharge) | | | | |
| +1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) | | | | |
| Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=0.00' (Free Discharge) | | | | |
| +2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) | | | | |
Source: HydroCAD® Summary Report; HydroCAD is a registered trademark of HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC. Used with permission.
WQDS Routing Table
| Time (hours) | Inflow (cfs) | Elevation (feet) | Outflow (cfs) | Discarded (cfs) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.30 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.40 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.50 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 0.60 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| 0.70 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 0.80 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 0.90 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.00 | 0.46 | 0.22 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.10 | 0.73 | 0.49 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.20 | 0.40 | 0.69 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.30 | 0.19 | 0.76 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.40 | 0.11 | 0.79 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.50 | 0.10 | 0.81 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.60 | 0.08 | 0.82 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.70 | 0.07 | 0.83 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.80 | 0.07 | 0.84 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.90 | 0.03 | 0.85 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 2.00 | 0.02 | 0.84 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
9. Table 9
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 30
| Time (hours) |
Inflow (cfs) |
Elevation (feet) |
Outflow (cfs) |
Discarded (cfs) |
| 0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.10 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.30 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.40 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.50 |
0.02 |
0.00 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 0.60 |
0.04 |
0.01 |
0.03 |
0.03 |
| 0.70 |
0.05 |
0.02 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 0.80 |
0.07 |
0.03 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 0.90 |
0.16 |
0.08 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.00 |
0.46 |
0.22 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.10 |
0.73 |
0.49 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.20 |
0.40 |
0.69 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.30 |
0.19 |
0.76 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.40 |
0.11 |
0.79 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.50 |
0.10 |
0.81 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.60 |
0.08 |
0.82 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.70 |
0.07 |
0.83 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.80 |
0.07 |
0.84 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 1.90 |
0.03 |
0.85 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
| 2.00 |
0.02 |
0.84 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
Source context and notes
| +1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) | | | | |
| Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=0.00' (Free Discharge) | | | | |
| +2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) | | | | |
Source: HydroCAD® Summary Report; HydroCAD is a registered trademark of HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC. Used with permission.
WQDS Routing Table
| Time (hours) | Inflow (cfs) | Elevation (feet) | Outflow (cfs) | Discarded (cfs) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.30 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.40 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.50 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 0.60 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| 0.70 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 0.80 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 0.90 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.00 | 0.46 | 0.22 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.10 | 0.73 | 0.49 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.20 | 0.40 | 0.69 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.30 | 0.19 | 0.76 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.40 | 0.11 | 0.79 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.50 | 0.10 | 0.81 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.60 | 0.08 | 0.82 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.70 | 0.07 | 0.83 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.80 | 0.07 | 0.84 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 1.90 | 0.03 | 0.85 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| 2.00 | 0.02 | 0.84 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
Source: HydroCAD® Routing Table; HydroCAD is a registered trademark of HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC. Used with permission
10. Table 10
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 31
| Inflow Drainage Area = |
0.25 ac of motor vehicle surface |
| Pavement NRCS Curve Number (CN) = |
98 |
| Soil Bed Depth = |
18 in |
| Side Slope above Soil Bed = |
3:1 (horizontal to vertical) |
| Tested Permeability of Soil Bed = |
8 in/hr |
| Tested Permeability of Subsoil = |
2 in/hr |
| Depth to the Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) = |
8 ft below existing ground level |
Source context and notes
$$
\text{Drain Time} = \frac{939 \, \text{cf}}{155 \, \text{cf/hr}} = 6.06 \, \text{hr}
$$
Note that the calculated drain time is less than the recommended 24-hour maximum for public areas exposed to pedestrian and vehicular traffic. A groundwater mounding analysis is required for all infiltration BMPs. The guidance for conducting a groundwater mounding analysis is available at Chapter 13. It is not shown here.
Example 3: For a new two-lane curbed roadway in an area outside the coastal plain, illustrated below, design a bioretention basin to infiltrate the runoff generated by the WQDS. Runoff will enter the proposed system as flow piped from a new shallow catch basin situated along the curb line and overflow will discharge to the existing stormwater collection system. The following parameters apply:
| Inflow Drainage Area = | 0.25 ac of motor vehicle surface |
| --- | --- |
| Pavement NRCS Curve Number (CN) = | 98 |
| Soil Bed Depth = | 18 in |
| Side Slope above Soil Bed = | 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) |
| Tested Permeability of Soil Bed = | 8 in/hr |
| Tested Permeability of Subsoil = | 2 in/hr |
| Depth to the Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) = | 8 ft below existing ground level |
[Figure: img-24.jpeg (original PDF, p. 31)](SOURCE.pdf#page=31)
11. Table 11
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 32
| Routing Table |
|
|
|
|
| Time (hours) |
Inflow (cfs) |
Elevation (feet) |
Outflow (cfs) |
Discarded (cfs) |
| 0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.10 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.30 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.40 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.50 |
0.02 |
0.01 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| 0.60 |
0.04 |
0.02 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 0.70 |
0.05 |
0.04 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 0.80 |
0.07 |
0.07 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 0.90 |
0.16 |
0.12 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.00 |
0.46 |
0.25 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.10 |
0.73 |
0.52 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.20 |
0.40 |
0.74 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.30 |
0.19 |
0.83 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.40 |
0.11 |
0.87 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.50 |
0.10 |
0.90 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.60 |
0.08 |
0.92 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.70 |
0.07 |
0.95 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.80 |
0.07 |
0.97 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 1.90 |
0.03 |
0.98 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 2.00 |
0.02 |
0.98 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 2.10 |
0.01 |
0.98 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 2.20 |
0.00 |
0.98 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 2.30 |
0.00 |
0.98 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 2.40 |
0.00 |
0.98 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
| 2.50 |
0.00 |
0.97 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
Source context and notes
Because exfiltration is incorporated in the routing calculaiton, pretreatment is required. An MTD is incorporated down-gradient of the catch basin and before the runoff enters the proposed basin. The MTD must be sized to handle the flowrate of the WQDS, which is 0.74 cfs in this example. An MTD that has 50% TSS removal rate can be selected from the list of certified MTDs available at https://www.nj.gov/dep/stormwater/treatment.html.
In accordance with the design criteria for this type of system, the maximum depth of runoff above the surface of the soil bed is 1 ft. The exfiltration rate, 1 in/hr, is one half the tested soil permeability rate. By trial and error, a bioretention basin is designed with a 600 sf soil bed area, or "footprint," and the depth of stormwater runoff is approximately 1 ft as the initial configuration. The side slopes are set at the limit of 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) above the soil bed. Assuming the soil bed is 6 ft wide and
100 ft long resulting in 600 sf of footprint of the basin. The surface area will be 1200 sf (100 ft by 12 ft) and 1500 sf (100 ft by 15 ft) due to the side slope, at 1 and 1.5 ft above the basin bottom, respectively. Exfiltration is allowed only within the footprint of the basin. No exfiltration is allowed on the side slopes. Therefore, the exfiltration flow through the bottom of the basin shall not exceed the flow rate produced by multiplying the footprint 600 sf with the design soil permeability 1 in/hr, which results in a flow rate of 0.01 cfs through the footprint of the basin. The hydrograph shows that the stormwater runoff in the basin during the WQDS reaches 0.98 ft above the soil bed. The depth of stormwater runoff generated is less than the maximum allowable depth of 1 ft. A riser with an orifice diameter of 6 inches is designed at an invert at 0.98 feet above the soil bed to bypass the stormwater runoff generated by storms larger than the WQDS.
The routing table is shown to the right, with the summary report depicted on the next page.
| Routing Table | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Time (hours) | Inflow (cfs) | Elevation (feet) | Outflow (cfs) | Discarded (cfs) |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.30 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.40 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.50 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 0.60 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 0.70 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 0.80 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 0.90 | 0.16 | 0.12 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.00 | 0.46 | 0.25 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.10 | 0.73 | 0.52 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.20 | 0.40 | 0.74 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.30 | 0.19 | 0.83 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.40 | 0.11 | 0.87 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.50 | 0.10 | 0.90 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.60 | 0.08 | 0.92 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.70 | 0.07 | 0.95 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.80 | 0.07 | 0.97 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 1.90 | 0.03 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 2.00 | 0.02 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 2.10 | 0.01 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 2.20 | 0.00 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 2.30 | 0.00 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 2.40 | 0.00 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| 2.50 | 0.00 | 0.97 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
Source: HydroCAD® Routing Table; HydroCAD is a registered trademark of HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC. Used with permission.
12. Table 12
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 33
| Inflow Area = 10,890 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.03" for WQ event |
|
|
|
|
| Inflow = 0.73 cfs @ 1.11 hrs, Volume= 939 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Outflow = 0.01 cfs @ 2.09 hrs, Volume= 939 cf, Atten= 99%, Lag= 59.3 min |
|
|
|
|
| Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 0.59 hrs, Volume= 939 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 2.09 hrs, Volume= 0 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs |
|
|
|
|
| Peak Elev= 0.98' @ 2.09 hrs Surf.Area= 1,190 sf Storage= 880 cf |
|
|
|
|
| Plug-Flow detention time= 742.4 min calculated for 939 cf (100% of inflow) |
|
|
|
|
| Center-of-Mass det. time= 742.5 min (812.8 - 70.3) |
|
|
|
|
| Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description |
|
|
|
|
| #1 0.00' 1,575 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) |
|
|
|
|
| Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store |
|
|
|
|
| (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) |
|
|
|
|
| 0.00 600 0 0 |
|
|
|
|
| 1.00 1,200 900 900 |
|
|
|
|
| 1.50 1,500 675 1,575 |
|
|
|
|
| Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices |
|
|
|
|
| #1 Discarded 0.00' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations |
|
|
|
|
| #2 Primary 0.98' 6.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 |
|
|
|
|
| Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 0.59 hrs HW=0.02' (Free Discharge) |
|
|
|
|
| +1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) |
|
|
|
|
| Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 2.09 hrs HW=0.98' (Free Discharge) |
|
|
|
|
| +2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.00 cfs @ 0.20 fps) |
|
|
|
|
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
WQDS Summary Table
| Inflow Area = 10,890 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.03" for WQ event | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Inflow = 0.73 cfs @ 1.11 hrs, Volume= 939 cf | | | | |
| Outflow = 0.01 cfs @ 2.09 hrs, Volume= 939 cf, Atten= 99%, Lag= 59.3 min | | | | |
| Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 0.59 hrs, Volume= 939 cf | | | | |
| Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 2.09 hrs, Volume= 0 cf | | | | |
| Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs | | | | |
| Peak Elev= 0.98' @ 2.09 hrs Surf.Area= 1,190 sf Storage= 880 cf | | | | |
| Plug-Flow detention time= 742.4 min calculated for 939 cf (100% of inflow) | | | | |
| Center-of-Mass det. time= 742.5 min (812.8 - 70.3) | | | | |
| Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description | | | | |
| #1 0.00' 1,575 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) | | | | |
| Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store | | | | |
| (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) | | | | |
| 0.00 600 0 0 | | | | |
| 1.00 1,200 900 900 | | | | |
| 1.50 1,500 675 1,575 | | | | |
| Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices | | | | |
| #1 Discarded 0.00' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations | | | | |
| #2 Primary 0.98' 6.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 | | | | |
| Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 0.59 hrs HW=0.02' (Free Discharge) | | | | |
| +1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) | | | | |
| Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 2.09 hrs HW=0.98' (Free Discharge) | | | | |
| +2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.00 cfs @ 0.20 fps) | | | | |
Source: HydroCAD® Summary Report; HydroCAD is a registered trademark of HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC. Used with permission.
## Step 3: Estimated Drain Time Calculation
For this step, the time it takes to drain the collected stormwater runoff below the surface of the soil bed must be calculated to verify it is less than the maximum of 72 hours. The drain time is determined by the permeability of the soil bed and the subsoil. The tested permeability of the subsoil is 2 in/hr, which results in a design permeability of 1 in/hr. The design permeability of the soil bed is 4 in/hr; therefore, the permeability of the subsoil is the limiting factor. For the WQDS, the drain time is calculated as follows:
13. Table 13
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 34
|
A |
B |
C |
D |
E |
F |
G |
H |
I |
J |
K |
|
| 6 |
Input Values |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
1.00 |
R |
|
Recharge rate (permeability rate) (in/hr) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
0.150 |
5y |
|
Specific yield, 5y (dimensionless)default value is 0.15; max value is 0.2 provided that a lab test data is submitted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
1.00 |
Kh |
|
Horizontal hydraulic conductivity (in/hr)Kh = 5xRecharge Rate (R) in the costal plan; Kh=R outside the coastal plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
50.000 |
x |
|
1/2 length of basin (x direction, in feet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
3.000 |
y |
|
1/2 width of basin (y direction, in feet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
18.78 |
t |
|
Duration of infiltration period (hours) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
10.00 |
hi(0) |
|
Initial thickness of saturated zone (feet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
12.861 |
h(max) |
|
Maximum thickness of saturated zone (beneath center of basin at end of infiltration period) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
2.861 |
Δh(max) |
|
Maximum groundwater mounding (beneath center of basin at end of infiltration period) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source context and notes
The vertical distance between the lowest elevation of the soil bed and the SHWT must be checked to ensure it meets the minimum separation requirement. By inspection, the sum of the 1.5 ft basin depth and the 1.5 ft soil bed depth equals a lowest point of the basin depth of 3 ft below the existing ground level. As stated previously, the SHWT is 8 ft below ground level. The elevation difference between the basin bottom and the SHWT is 5 ft, which is greater than the 2 ft minimum separation requirement.
Step 5: Groundwater Mounding Analysis
Calculate the height of the groundwater mounding caused by the infiltration of stormwater runoff to ensure that doing so will neither impact the system, meaning prevent infiltration, nor impact nearby structures. For information on conducting a groundwater mounding analysis, see Chapter 13. For this example, the recharge rate is the design permeability rate of 1.0 in/hr. The horizontal hydraulic conductivity is also 1 in/hr since the site is outside the coastal plain. One-half of the length and width of the soil bed area, 50 and 3 ft, respectively, are the values to be input for x and y. The duration of infiltration period, for analyzing the WQDS, is the drain time, 18.78 hr, as calculated in Step 3. The results calculated by using the Hantush Spreadsheet are shown below.
Example 3: Input Section of the Hantush Spreadsheet and Calculated $\Delta h(\max)$
| | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 6 | Input Values | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 7 | 1.00 | R | | Recharge rate (permeability rate) (in/hr) | | | | | | | | |
| 8 | 0.150 | 5y | | Specific yield, 5y (dimensionless)default value is 0.15; max value is 0.2 provided that a lab test data is submitted | | | | | | | | |
| 9 | 1.00 | Kh | | Horizontal hydraulic conductivity (in/hr)Kh = 5xRecharge Rate (R) in the costal plan; Kh=R outside the coastal plan | | | | | | | | |
| 10 | 50.000 | x | | 1/2 length of basin (x direction, in feet) | | | | | | | | |
| 11 | 3.000 | y | | 1/2 width of basin (y direction, in feet) | | | | | | | | |
| 12 | 18.78 | t | | Duration of infiltration period (hours) | | | | | | | | |
| 13 | 10.00 | hi(0) | | Initial thickness of saturated zone (feet) | | | | | | | | |
| 14 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 15 | 12.861 | h(max) | | Maximum thickness of saturated zone (beneath center of basin at end of infiltration period) | | | | | | | | |
| 16 | 2.861 | Δh(max) | | Maximum groundwater mounding (beneath center of basin at end of infiltration period) | | | | | | | | |
The SHWT is 8.0 ft below the basin bottom. The maximum mounding height is 2.861 ft above the SHWT, meaning the highest point of the mounding is located 5.139 ft below ground level. The bottom of the soil bed is 3 feet below the ground level. Therefore, the temporarily increased elevation in the groundwater level, produced by infiltrating stormwater runoff generated by the WQDS, will not interfere with the drainage of the proposed bioretention system.
Step 6: Overflow Configuration
The small-scale bioretention system in this example is an on-line system. On-line systems receive runoff from all storms events and they convey the runoff from larger storms through an overflow, which, in this example, consists of a berm and an overflow riser. The opening in the riser is set at an elevation 1 ft above the surface of the soil bed; this design allows the accumulation of runoff up to the elevation of stormwater runoff generated by the WQDS to infiltrate; excess runoff discharges through the overflow pipe, which is fitted with a debris cap to protect the opening from becoming clogged with vegetative matter and trash.
14. Table 14
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 45
| Bloom Information for Various Small-scale Bioretention System Plants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Common Name |
Genus |
Species |
Height |
Bloom Color |
Bloom Start |
Bloom End |
| Spicebush, Wild allspice |
Lindera |
benzoin |
6 – 12' |
white, yellow |
April |
April |
| Marsh marigold, Yellow marsh marigold, Cowslip |
Caltha |
palustris |
1 – 3' |
yellow |
April |
May |
| Kinnikinnick, Red bearberry |
Arctostaphylos |
uva-ursi |
1 – 3' |
white, pink |
March |
June |
| Common Winterberry |
Ilex |
verticillata |
6 – 12' |
white flowers, red berries |
April |
July |
| Highbush blueberry |
Vaccinium |
corymbosum |
6 – 12' |
pink, white |
May |
June |
| Arrowwood |
Viburnum |
dentatum |
6 – 12' |
white |
May |
July |
| Harlequin blueflag, Northern blue flag, Large blue iris |
Iris |
versicolor |
1 – 3' |
blue, purple |
May |
August |
| Sweet fern |
Comptonia |
peregrina |
3 – 6' |
white, green |
May |
August |
| Deertongue |
Dichanthelium |
clandestinum |
3 – 6' |
green stems |
May |
September |
| Cardinal flower |
Lobelia |
Cardinalis |
3 – 6' |
red |
May |
October |
| Allegheny monkeyflower, Monkeyflower, Square-stemmed monkeyflower |
Mimulus |
ringens |
1 – 3' |
blue, purple |
June |
September |
| Common Buttonbush |
Cephalanthus |
occidentalis |
6 – 12' |
white, pink |
June |
September |
| Inkberry |
Ilex |
glabra |
6 – 12' |
white flowers, black berries |
June |
September |
| Woolgrass, Cottongrass bulrush |
Scirpus |
cyperinus |
3 – 6' |
green, brown |
June |
September |
| Swamp milkweed, Pink milkweed |
Asclepias |
incarnata |
3 – 6' |
pink, purple |
June |
October |
| Blue vervain, Swamp verbena |
Verbena |
hastata |
3 – 6' |
blue, purple |
June |
October |
| Clethra, Summersweet |
Clethra |
alnifolia |
3 – 6' 6 – 12' |
white, pink |
July |
August |
| Beggar's tick sunflower, Devil's beggartick, Spanish needles |
Bidens |
frondosa |
0 – 1' 1 – 3' |
yellow |
July |
August |
| American tiger lily, Turk's cap lily, Swamp lily |
Lilium |
superbum |
3 – 6' |
red, orange, yellow |
July |
September |
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
| Bloom Information for Various Small-scale Bioretention System Plants | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Common Name | Genus | Species | Height | Bloom Color | Bloom Start | Bloom End |
| Spicebush, Wild allspice | Lindera | benzoin | 6 – 12' | white, yellow | April | April |
| Marsh marigold, Yellow marsh marigold, Cowslip | Caltha | palustris | 1 – 3' | yellow | April | May |
| Kinnikinnick, Red bearberry | Arctostaphylos | uva-ursi | 1 – 3' | white, pink | March | June |
| Common Winterberry | Ilex | verticillata | 6 – 12' | white flowers, red berries | April | July |
| Highbush blueberry | Vaccinium | corymbosum | 6 – 12' | pink, white | May | June |
| Arrowwood | Viburnum | dentatum | 6 – 12' | white | May | July |
| Harlequin blueflag, Northern blue flag, Large blue iris | Iris | versicolor | 1 – 3' | blue, purple | May | August |
| Sweet fern | Comptonia | peregrina | 3 – 6' | white, green | May | August |
| Deertongue | Dichanthelium | clandestinum | 3 – 6' | green stems | May | September |
| Cardinal flower | Lobelia | Cardinalis | 3 – 6' | red | May | October |
| Allegheny monkeyflower, Monkeyflower, Square-stemmed monkeyflower | Mimulus | ringens | 1 – 3' | blue, purple | June | September |
| Common Buttonbush | Cephalanthus | occidentalis | 6 – 12' | white, pink | June | September |
| Inkberry | Ilex | glabra | 6 – 12' | white flowers, black berries | June | September |
| Woolgrass, Cottongrass bulrush | Scirpus | cyperinus | 3 – 6' | green, brown | June | September |
| Swamp milkweed, Pink milkweed | Asclepias | incarnata | 3 – 6' | pink, purple | June | October |
| Blue vervain, Swamp verbena | Verbena | hastata | 3 – 6' | blue, purple | June | October |
| Clethra, Summersweet | Clethra | alnifolia | 3 – 6' 6 – 12' | white, pink | July | August |
| Beggar's tick sunflower, Devil's beggartick, Spanish needles | Bidens | frondosa | 0 – 1' 1 – 3' | yellow | July | August |
| American tiger lily, Turk's cap lily, Swamp lily | Lilium | superbum | 3 – 6' | red, orange, yellow | July | September |
Legend: Shrub Grass or Sedge Herb
15. Table 15
BMP 2021, Ch 9.7, p. 46
| Bloom Information for Various Small-scale Bioretention System Plants (cont'd.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Common Name |
Genus |
Species |
Height |
Bloom Color |
Bloom Start |
Bloom End |
| Common threesquare, American bulrush |
Schoenoplectus |
pungens |
3 – 6' |
brown spikelets |
July |
September |
| Joe Pye weed, Trumpetweed, |
Eutrochium |
fistulosum |
3 – 6' 6 – 12' |
pink, purple |
July |
September |
| Purple Joe Pye weed Sweet Joe Pye weed |
Eutrochium |
purpureum |
3 – 6' |
pink, purple |
July |
September |
| Turtlehead, White turtlehead |
Chelone |
glabra |
3 – 6' |
white, pink |
July |
September |
| Northern Bayberry |
Morella |
pennsylvanica |
6 – 12' |
yellow flowers, blueish white berries |
July |
October |
| Common sneezeweed, Fall sneezeweed, Autumn sneezeweed |
Helenium |
autumnale |
1 – 3' 3 – 6' |
yellow |
July |
October |
| Cutleaf coneflower, Green-headed coneflower |
Rudbeckia |
laciniata |
3 – 6' |
yellow |
July |
October |
| Great blue lobelia |
Lobelia |
siphilitica |
1 – 3' |
blue |
July |
October |
| New York aster |
Symphyotrichum |
novi-belgii |
3 – 6' |
blue |
July |
October |
| Roundleaf goldenrod |
Solidago |
patula |
3 – 6' |
yellow |
July |
October |
| New York ironweed |
Vernonia |
novaboracensis |
3 – 6' |
red, purple |
August |
September |
| Lowland broomsedge, Bushy bluestem |
Andropogon |
glomeratus |
3 – 6' |
white, brown |
August |
November |
| New England aster, New England American aster |
Symphyotrichum |
novae-angliae |
3 – 6' |
pink, purple |
August |
October |
| Switchgrass |
Panicum |
Virgatum |
3 – 6' |
green, brown |
August |
November |
| Wrinkleleaf goldenrod, Wrinkle-leaf goldenrod, Rough-leaved goldenrod |
Solidago |
rugosa |
3 – 6' |
yellow |
September |
September |
| Witch hazel |
Hamemelis |
virginiana |
6 – 12' |
orange, yellow |
September |
December |
Source context and notes
# Small-Scale Bioretention Systems
Source revision: March 2021.
| Bloom Information for Various Small-scale Bioretention System Plants (cont'd.) | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Common Name | Genus | Species | Height | Bloom Color | Bloom Start | Bloom End |
| Common threesquare, American bulrush | Schoenoplectus | pungens | 3 – 6' | brown spikelets | July | September |
| Joe Pye weed, Trumpetweed, | Eutrochium | fistulosum | 3 – 6' 6 – 12' | pink, purple | July | September |
| Purple Joe Pye weed Sweet Joe Pye weed | Eutrochium | purpureum | 3 – 6' | pink, purple | July | September |
| Turtlehead, White turtlehead | Chelone | glabra | 3 – 6' | white, pink | July | September |
| Northern Bayberry | Morella | pennsylvanica | 6 – 12' | yellow flowers, blueish white berries | July | October |
| Common sneezeweed, Fall sneezeweed, Autumn sneezeweed | Helenium | autumnale | 1 – 3' 3 – 6' | yellow | July | October |
| Cutleaf coneflower, Green-headed coneflower | Rudbeckia | laciniata | 3 – 6' | yellow | July | October |
| Great blue lobelia | Lobelia | siphilitica | 1 – 3' | blue | July | October |
| New York aster | Symphyotrichum | novi-belgii | 3 – 6' | blue | July | October |
| Roundleaf goldenrod | Solidago | patula | 3 – 6' | yellow | July | October |
| New York ironweed | Vernonia | novaboracensis | 3 – 6' | red, purple | August | September |
| Lowland broomsedge, Bushy bluestem | Andropogon | glomeratus | 3 – 6' | white, brown | August | November |
| New England aster, New England American aster | Symphyotrichum | novae-angliae | 3 – 6' | pink, purple | August | October |
| Switchgrass | Panicum | Virgatum | 3 – 6' | green, brown | August | November |
| Wrinkleleaf goldenrod, Wrinkle-leaf goldenrod, Rough-leaved goldenrod | Solidago | rugosa | 3 – 6' | yellow | September | September |
| Witch hazel | Hamemelis | virginiana | 6 – 12' | orange, yellow | September | December |
Legend: Shrub Grass or Sedge Herb
Images on table pages
Page associations do not establish that a crop depicts a specific table.