|
| |
Illinois Urban Manual
Technical Note No. 1
SOIL QUALITY – URBAN TECHNICAL NOTE
No. 1
Erosion and Sedimentation on Construction
Sites
Introduction
Soil is a crucial component of rural and urban
environments, and in both places land management is the key to soil quality.
This series of technical notes examines the urban activities causing soil
degradation and sedimentation, and the management practices that protect the
functions that urban societies demand from soil. This technical note will focus
on soil erosion and sedimentation from construction sites.
Off site damage from sediment is the most
critical problem facing construction sites. Erosion, which produces this
sediment, is accelerated when soil is disturbed, left bare, and exposed to the
abrasive action of wind and water. Unless adequate measures are taken to prevent
this abnormal, highly accelerated soil removal, it becomes the most visible and
damaging factor in the deterioration of soil quality and the environmental
quality of urban areas.
Construction Erosion
Although erosion on construction sites often
affects only a relatively small acreage of land in a watershed, it is a major
source of sediment because the potential for erosion on highly disturbed land is
commonly 100 times greater than on agricultural land (Brady and Weil, 1999).
Erosion and sediment damages occur both on and off the construction site, and
all of society pays for the destructive impacts.
Erosion Impacts
Construction activities, such as grading and
filling, drastically reduce soil quality on construction sites. Left
unprotected, sites will be further degraded by erosion and begin to adversely
affect the surrounding environment. The goal of soil quality management on
construction sites is to revegetate for protection against off-site damage and
increase soil organic matter levels to remedy the on-site damage caused by site
preparation.
On-site impacts:
The loss of topsoil, either by actual removal with heavy equipment or erosion by
wind and water, is the worst on-site damage in urban areas. This layer of soil
has the highest biological activity, organic matter, and plant nutrients—all
key components of healthy soil. The on-site loss of this upper layer of soil
nearly eliminates the soil’s natural ability to provide nutrients, regulate
water flow, and combat pests and disease.
- Loss of nutrients and nutrient holding
capacity, results in a less fertile environment for lawns and landscape
plants. The organic matter and finer soil particles are responsible for soil
fertility and are washed away first, leaving larger, less reactive particles
such as sand and gravel.
- As organic matter is lost, soil density
increases and compaction occurs. Compaction lowers the infiltration rate of
water and reduces the available water holding capacity. This results in
poorer growth of lawns, gardens, flowerbeds, shrubs, and trees, as well as
making the site more susceptible to drought and requiring more frequent
watering. Additionally, soil amendments such as fertilizer and pesticides
cannot move into the soil and, instead, run off into nearby lakes and
streams. Lower organic matter levels are also associated with weaker soil
aggregates and therefore greater risk of further erosion and soil crusting.
- The surface organic matter is also the food
source and habitat for beneficial microorganisms and insects. The loss of this
material drastically reduces the soils natural ability to control disease and
pest outbreaks, increasing the need for pesticides. These microorganisms are
also key to removing or buffering toxic elements or contaminants.
Off-site impacts:
Erosion from construction sites has off-site environmental and economic impacts.
Erosion creates two major water quality problems in surface waters and drainage
ways: excess nutrients and excess sediment. These problems adversely impact the
health and biological diversity of water bodies. More specifically:
- Excess nutrients impact water quality through
eutrophication, a process whereby excess nitrogen and phosphorus causes
unwanted biological growth.
- Sediment reduces water quality by making the
water turbid (cloudy). Turbidity prevents sunlight from penetrating the
water and thus reduces photosynthesis and underwater vegetation. Oxygen
levels are reduced in turbid waters, further degrading habitat for fish and
other aquatic organisms.
- Sediment can build up in stream channels,
lowering flow capacity. The problem of low stream capacity is compounded as
runoff increases from newly built-up or paved areas and causes stream
channels to receive larger amounts of water in shorter periods of time. This
leads to more frequent flooding in areas that never or only rarely flooded
in the past. In flood-prone areas, levees may need to be built or enlarged
to better protect public safety.
- A financial burden results from clean up of
sediment-damaged areas. Taxpayers often bear the cost of removing sediment
from public roads, road ditches, culverts or streams; not to mention damage
to homes and the safety hazards associated with flooding. Other costs of
erosion that are borne by the public are degraded soils, a polluted
environment, more runoff, greater need for irrigation, and aesthetically
unpleasing sites.
Many local governments enforce regulations to
control or prevent erosion from construction sites. State and local laws and
the Clean Water Act of 1992 can require contractors to develop detailed
erosion and sediment control plans before beginning construction projects over
approximately 2.5 acres.
Tool for Estimating Erosion on Construction Sites
Soil loss from sheet and rill erosion on
construction sites, mined lands, reclaimed lands, and other highly disturbed
areas can be estimated using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
version 1.06. A handbook is available to help the user estimate factor values
and apply the computer model (Toy and Foster, 1998).
The person in each NRCS State or Basin Area
Office with responsibility for RUSLE (typically the state agronomist) should be
contacted for assistance with estimating soil loss on construction sites using
RUSLE.
Evaluating Management Practices and Developing
Alternative Systems
Erosion control practices and management systems
can be evaluated and planned using the RUSLE model. The erosion control benefits
of cover and management practices such as adding mulch, seeding, and sod can be
estimated with the RUSLE conservation management (C) factor. Structural and
vegetative practices such as straw bales, silt fences, gravel bags, narrow grass
strips or buffers, vegetative barriers, terraces and diversions can be evaluated
with the RUSLE conservation practice (P) factor.
Alternative management systems, consisting of
combinations of cover and structural practices, can be developed with the RUSLE
program. Ideally, these management systems will reduce or control erosion and
sedimentation and improve soil quality. Each site and management system must be
evaluated individually, since erosion estimates will vary depending on climate,
soils, topography, and cover conditions.
The RUSLE model also estimates the amount of
sediment delivered to the base of a slope (sediment yield) using the RUSLE P
factor. Some temporary practices used on construction sites such as a silt fence
placed at the base of the slope will not reduce erosion on the slope but will
trap some of the sediment leaving that slope. The RUSLE model estimates this
sediment yield, as displayed in Table 1.
Table 1. Effects of management practices on
controlling erosion on a road bank. Estimated sheet and rill erosion and
sediment yield using RUSLE during a construction year in Nashville, TN1/.
Table 1
|
Site Conditions 2/ |
Soil Loss from Road Bank
(t/a/y) |
Sediment Yield at Base of
Slope
(t/a/y) |
|
1st 6 mo |
2nd 6 mo |
|
|
Bare |
Bare |
400 |
400 |
|
Bare |
Bare, Silt Fence |
400 |
250 |
|
Bare |
Mulch, Seeded |
140 |
140 |
|
Bare |
Sod, Diversion |
40 |
5 |
1/ Effects
of management will vary under other climatic conditions. For example, soil
loss and sediment yield will be 35 % and 80 % less in Chicago and Denver,
respectively, than values shown in table.
2/ Roadside cutbank, 100 ft. long at 30% gradient. Site disturbed from March – June.
Soil loss and sediment yield during a single construction season. Soil is a
silt loam. Silt fence placed at base of slope. Diversion placed in middle of
slope.
Principles of Construction Erosion Control
Prevention of urban erosion is best. Here are
some basic principles of erosion control on construction sites (adapted from
Brady and Weil, 1999):
- Divide the project into smaller phases
clearing smaller areas of vegetation.
- Schedule excavation during low-rainfall
periods, when possible.
- Fit development to the terrain.
- Excavate immediately before construction
instead of leaving soils exposed for months or years.
- Cover disturbed soils as soon as possible with
vegetation or other materials (mulch) to reduce erosion potential.
- Divert water from disturbed areas.
- Control concentrated flow and runoff to reduce
the volume and velocity of water from work sites to prevent formation of
rills and gullies.
- Minimize length and steepness of slopes (e.g.
use bench terraces).
- Prevent sediment movement off-site.
- Inspect and maintain any structural control
measures.
- Where wind erosion is a concern, plan and
install windbreaks.
- Avoid soil compaction by restricting the use
of trucks and heavy equipment to limited areas.
- Soils compacted by grading need to be broken
up or tilled prior to vegetating or placing sod.
It is inevitable that soil will be exposed during
construction. However, it is essential that the exposed land is minimized, and
cover is established as quickly as possible. Conservation practices that provide
immediate permanent cover (sod) or provide intermittent cover (mulches and
permanent seeding) drastically reduce soil losses and runoff (Table 2). Other
supporting practices such as diversions or terraces change slope lengths, thus
reducing runoff and erosion. These supporting practices provide temporary
protection for vegetation or sod until they become established and provide
permanent protection for the site. There are other conservation practices
available for construction and urban erosion (NRCS Watershed Science Institute,
2000).
Table 2. Effectiveness of various groundcovers
in reducing runoff and soil erosion for a single simulated rain event (3.78
in/h) at University of Maryland’s turf grass research facility1/
(adapted from Brady and Weil, 1999).
Table 2
| Material |
Soil loss 2/
(tons/acre) |
% of Rainfall Runoff |
% Ground Cover Established 3/ |
|
Bare soil with partial cover |
2.97 |
83 |
50 |
|
Woven mesh |
0.18 |
68 |
61 |
|
Wood shavens in non-woven
polyester netting
|
0.36 |
74 |
69 |
|
Coconut fiber mat |
0.48 |
76 |
58 |
|
Straw (2 t/a) |
0.26 |
60 |
76 |
|
Grass sod |
0.04 |
28 |
NA |
1/ Effectiveness
will vary at other locations because of differences in climate, soils and
topography.
2/ Soil from Sassafras
loamy sand with a 8 % slope and a Matapeake sandy clay loam with a 15% slope.
3/ Percent vegetation cover
established one year after Kentucky 31 fescue grass was seeded and covered by
various material.
Conclusion
Soil is important but is often an overlooked
component of our urban infrastructure. It is especially important in regulating
runoff of storm water and in supporting trees, shrubs, lawns, and gardens. Soil
erosion during construction is often a serious problem. Many erosion control
practices are available in local soil and water conservation district offices.
However, the effects of erosion on construction sites continue to menace society
both from on-site and off-site damages. Preventing soil-related problems before
they occur is easier and more cost effective than correcting them later.
Communities need to work with developers, contractors, and local governments to
limit compaction and soil loss during construction operations. The result is a
soil functioning properly in the urban landscape.
References
Brady, N.C., and R.R. Weil. 1999. The Nature and
Properties of Soils. 12th ed. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, NJ.
NRCS Watershed Science Institute. 2000. Water related
best management practices in the landscape. ftp://ftp.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/pub/wssi/UrbanBMPs/index.html
Toy, T.J. and G.R. Foster, co-editors. 1998.
Guidelines for the use of the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
version 1.06 on Mined Lands, Construction Sites, and Reclaimed Lands. USDI-Office
of Surface Mining. Denver, CO.
Table of Contents
< Back to Table of Contents
| |
|