Evaluation of the effects of low-impact development practices under different rainy types: case of Fuxing Island Park, Shanghai, China

  • Hong-Wu WangEmail author
  • Yue-Jiao Zhai
  • Yuan-Yuan Wei
  • Yun-Feng Mao
Research Article


The soil permeability and underground water level greatly affect the performance of low-impact development (LID) practices. Shanghai is located in the area of estuary and is characterized by its high groundwater level and low soil infiltration rate. The LID practices in Fuxing Island Park, Shanghai, including a bioretention cell, swales, a permeable pavement, and a combined LID practices were studied in the present paper. The performance of LID practices during the period of eight rainfall events was evaluated in terms of hydrology and water quality. Due to the detention of the LID practices, a significant delay between the peak rainfall and the peak surface runoff was observed. On-site tests show it is suitable for the applicability of LID in a rainy city with low soil infiltration rate and high groundwater level. Moreover, the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) was also used to compare the hydrologic effects before and after these four LID practices application in the park. Results indicated the LID practices could effectively reduce the runoff volume and the peak flow in the park. Furthermore, the runoff water quality evaluation showed the pollutants were effectively removed by these four LID practices due to both runoff treatment and flow volume reduction. The bioretention system proved to be effective as a result of its larger facility area while the swales had the obvious reduction volume both per facility area and per catchment area.


Stormwater management Low-impact development (LID) Water quantity Water quality 


Funding information

The authors wish to thank National Major Science and Technology Project on Water Pollution Control and Management of China (2013ZX07304-003) for the financial support of this study.


  1. Chandrasena GI, Pham T, Payne EG, Deletic A, Mccarthy DT (2014) E. coli removal in laboratory scale stormwater biofilters: influence of vegetation and submerged zone. J Hydrol 519:814–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Davis AP (2007) Field performance of bioretention: water quality. Environ Eng Sci 24:1048–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis AP (2008) Field performance of bioretention: hydrology impacts. J Hydrol Eng 13:90–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis AP, Shokouhian M, Sharma H, Minami C (2001) Laboratory study of biological retention for urban storm water management. Water Environ Res 73(1):5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fryd O, Dam T, Jensen MB (2012) A planning framework for sustainable urban drainage systems. Water Policy 14:865–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Furlong C, Gan K, De Silva S (2016) Governance of integrated urban water management in Melbourne, Australia. Util Policy 43:48–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gulbaz S, Kazezyılmaz-Alhan CM, opty NK (2015) Evaluation of heavy metal removal capacity of bioretention systems. Water Air Soil Pollut 226(11):376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hunt WF, Jarrett AR, Smith JT, Sharkey LJ (2006) Evaluating bioretention hydrology and nutrient removal at three field sites in North Carolina. J Irrig Drain E ASCE 132(6):600–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hunt WF, Smith JT, Jadlocki SJ, Hathaway JM, Eubanks PR (2008) Pollutant removal and peak flow mitigation by a bioretention cell in urban Charlotte, NC. J Environ Eng 134(5):403–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hunt WF, Hathaway JM, Winston RJ, Jadlocki SJ (2010) Runoff volume reduction by a level spreader-vegetated filter strip system in suburban Charlotte, N.C. J Hydrol Eng 15(6):499–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jia HF, Lu YW, Lu YW, Yu SL, Chen YR (2012) Planning of LID-BMPs for urban runoff control: the case of Beijing Olympic Village. Sep Purif Technol 84(SI):112–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khan U, Valeo C, Chu A, van Duin B (2012) Bioretention cell efficacy in cold climates: part 1:hydrologic performance. Can J Civil Eng 39(11):1210–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Le Coustumer S, Fletcher TD, Deletic A, Barraud S, Poelsma P (2012) The influence of design parameters on clogging of stormwater biofilters: a large-scale column study. Water Res 46(SI):6743–6752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. LeFevre GH, Paus KH, Natarajan P, Gulliver JS, Novak PJ, Hozalski RM (2015) Review of dissolved pollutants in urban storm water and their removal and fate in bioretention cells. J Environ Eng 141(1):04014050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li H, Sharkey LJ, Hunt WF, Davis AP (2009) Mitigation of impervious surface hydrology using bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland. J Hydrol Eng 14(SI):407–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lucke T, Nichols PWB (2015) The pollution removal and stormwater reduction performance of street-side bioretention basins after ten years in operation. Sci Total Environ 536:784–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Muthanna TM, Viklander M, Thorolfsson ST (2008) Seasonal climatic effects on the hydrology of a rain garden. Hydrol Process 22(11):1640–1649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. U.S. EPA (1983) Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes, EPA 600/4-79-020. Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio, p 45268Google Scholar
  19. U.S. EPA (2001) Method 200.7: Trace elements in water, solids, and biosolids by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry, revision 5.0, EPA-821-R-01-010. Office of Research and Development, Cincinatti, Ohio, p 45268Google Scholar
  20. Wella-Hewage CS, Hewa GA, Pezzaniti D (2016) Can water sensitive urban design systems help to preserve natural channel-forming flow regimes in an urbanised catchment? Water Sci Technol 73(1):78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wilson C, Hunt W, Winston R, Smith P (2015) Comparison of runoff quality and quantity from a commercial low-impact and conventional development in Raleigh, North Carolina. J Environ Eng ASCE 141(2):05014005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhou Q (2014) A review of sustainable urban drainage systems considering the climate change and urbanization impacts. Water 6(4):976–992CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hong-Wu Wang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Yue-Jiao Zhai
    • 1
  • Yuan-Yuan Wei
    • 1
  • Yun-Feng Mao
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, College of Envrionmental Science and TechnologyTongji UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Shanghai Institute of Pollution Control and Ecological SecurityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations