September 2009

Permeable Pavers

Part 1: Choosing products and installation methods

Article Tools

Create a Link to this Article

Photo: Pine Hall Brick Inc.

By Carol Brzozowski

6 Comments

As a stormwater manager in a state where folks joke that there are two seasons—wet and dry—Elizabeth Wong of North Port, FL, is always on the lookout for stormwater treatment methods that are cost-effective, address water quality, need little maintenance, and are even aesthetically pleasing.

Wong is turning her focus on permeable pavement and paver systems.

Permeable pavement is one of four recommended low-impact development (LID) methods promoted in an LID manual being developed by Sarasota County, FL, and the Southwest Florida Water Management District.

Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection is working on a statewide water-quality treatment rule to get everyone on the same page, says Wong. One of the key factors to encourage LID is getting credit for the use of permeable pavement, Wong points out.

“LID is going to be a very key component of meeting those new stormwater treatment rules,” she says, noting that a developer might receive credit for using permeable pavers and reducing the size of a retention pond on the same site. “A pond takes up space in the development of an expensive piece of property. If you’ve got permeable pavement, then you don’t need as big a pond. More of the runoff will go in the ground rather than be held back in a pond.”

Permeable pavement can take the form of concrete pavers, plantable and drivable grass products, bricks, and recycled tires, as well as asphalt and poured-in-place concrete. This article focuses mainly on paver-type products.

How to choose which product is most appropriate depends on the application, says Jack Miriam, the environmental manager for Sarasota County. General questions to consider include installation procedures; what type of base course is needed; and whether the native soil needs to be replaced with another type for better drainage and infiltration. The installation and the soil type can also affect load-bearing capacity, maintenance requirements, and ability to filter pollutants from stormwater runoff. In cold climates, the surface’s ability to be plowed may also be a consideration.

According to the Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute (ICPI), permeable pavement is a best management practice (BMP) for stormwater control under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).

Additionally, permeable pavement can receive Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) points for sustainability, a fact echoed by SF Concrete Technology, which licenses concrete producers to manufacture interlocking permeable pavers, among other products. The use of permeable pavement can help maintain the predevelopment hydrology of a watershed.

Advertisement

The ICPI reports that open-graded aggregate in the surface and base course helps receive, store, and infiltrate runoff into the soil underneath.

All permeable pavements have high initial surface infiltration rates, according to ICPI, and studies show that permeable pavement can significantly reduce runoff while lowering suspended solids, nutrients, and metals. Next Page >

What Do You Think?

Post a Comment

MarkR

August 4th, 2010 10:28 AM PT

Essentially, depending on the quality of sub-soils and the depth of base, permeable applications can take on almost any amount of water. We have installed applications for truck washing bays which introduce a tremendous amount of water into the system, but we took all that into consideration when designing the base composition. Mark - www.twobrothersbrickpaving.com/permeable_pavers.htm

DennisN

October 7th, 2009 8:24 AM PT

I don't see why your permeable paver system cannot be designed to accept offsite flow. If the soil infiltration rate will accept the additional inflow, it's a matter of increasing the base thickness to accommodate the additional storage required.

gmears

September 16th, 2009 3:13 PM PT

I work with a stormwater drainage advisory group in a North Carolina Outer Banks community and we keep hearing that permeable pavers are easily clogged by fine sand and require maintenance at such a frequency that the costs to keep these things functional appear to be prohibitive. This concern has made us look to other solutions for our beach house community of over 800 half acre properties located along the ocean. The problem was caused by infill development and commercial development upgradient from our community in an area with very poor stormwater control and building inspection standards. The County has yet to consider pre-and post construction runoff hydrocurve evaluations which would drive the builders to look for their own solutions. The problem with most articles like this is that too many of them come across as the optimum solution to every flooding and drainage problem --which we know can't be true. So the article is read liek any other sales pitch simply because the author seems to be trying to avoid revealing any of the product's warts. Even if you have no clue as to where the product will work, suggest to us what the critical parameters are that make pavers work so that the readers can see if those parameters can be controlled in an alternative environment. I noticed one red flag in a discussion about sand used in northern climates triggers the need for maintenance. In a beach environment, sand is a constant issue. Bottom line: the addition of a serious applicability discussion adds so much credibility to an article and, without one, I review with caution and don't bother looking much further--and I'm a project engineer. Effective articles need to move beyond what sounds like a sales pitch by the late Billy May to something that deals with suggesting solutions to real problems that occur in actual environments. Without such a discussion the articles simply come across as "too good to be true", reducing the article to "interesting--but buyer beware".

RonSearcy

September 3rd, 2009 11:53 AM PT

Tory, I too am surprised at the lack of interest in this article but it may just be new enough that not that many have read it. You made a good point about perm rates as well as recognizing P Pavers are not a one-size-fits-all solution. But we need to keep educating the uninitiated about the potential benefits and help skeptics get over the short-term, higher first-cost issues to recognize the long-term benefits and sustainability.

Tory R. Walker

September 1st, 2009 5:18 PM PT

I am a bit surprised that there has been NO discussion on this topic. I guess it is just me that thinks this is worth looking at closer. I did, however, have a conversation today with a gentleman from Houston (I am in So. Cal.) regarding what can affect permeability of various pavements. It reinforced in my mind the importance of carefully considering ALL factors and how they can greatly influence the permeability. As he said, "in Houston, it's either raining cats and dogs or it's not raining." Also, if the soils under the base material are gumbo clay, there are other issues. This at least is a good reminder that permeable pavers are not always a good fit.

Tory R. Walker

August 26th, 2009 8:47 AM PT

My comment is not really about Carol's well written article, as she always does a good job, but about a seemingly obvious shortcoming in the permeable paver industry's own presentation of the long-term effectiveness of properly installed pavers (as illustrated in this same issue's "Porous Pavements Q&A"). The independent data I have researched supports a consistently high permeability (as high as 140+ in/hour, as reported in the Q&A) when properly maintained. I believe the data and research, and I would love to see permeable pavers used more often, so I have been trying for some time to advocate for using long-term permeability rates that actually use the supporting data. I don't know why the industry falls back on accounting only for rain that falls on the pavement. Data (even without annual maintenance) would support using high rates of permeability that would accept runoff from offsite areas as well. They seem reluctant to go there, yet in my own experience trying to sell the idea to developers (not municipalities who could have more incentives for using pavers), it usually doesn't quite pencil out for them. Most often the 20-year life cylce cost savings doesn't work for them. I think the technology has already gone through the "causes of failure" learning curve, so why not use it to store or detain excess runoff? I believe doing so would lead to exponential growth of this industry. I would be interested in any feedback on this, especially if I am not seeing the whole picture. tory@trwengineering.com

Post a Comment

Not a subscriber? Sign Up
 
 
*  
 




 

Get Stormwater E-mail Updates!

Get weekly news and updates through our Stormwater e-mail newsletter!