Project Planning & Design - Infiltration

Follow

Omar Fernandez

March 16, 2024 15:48

I'm not entirely clear on why grass isn't being considered as an option here. Grass is a permeable material, which means it lets water seep into the soil below. Plus, grass absorbs water through its roots, which can help reduce runoff. Considering this area is environmentally sensitive, I think having grass would be a better choice. Additionally, I believe grass would have a higher infiltration rate compared to crushed stone because it absorbs and allows water to permeate. 

0

• 

  Gang Chen March 16, 2024 16:19

  Grass is an excellent material for infiltration, but not a good choice for pathway traffic. Architecture is an balanced act for various considerations.
  Gang Chen, Author, AIA, LEED AP BD+C (GreenExamEducation.com)

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Omar Fernandez March 16, 2024 17:13

  Another consideration is that maintaining grass would likely incur higher costs compared to maintaining crushed stone. The increased maintenance expenses and the significant water requirements for grass upkeep make it a less sustainable option. 

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Michael Ermann March 16, 2024 23:39

  Piling on here, grass is not ADA-compliant. Somewhat surprisingly, crushed stone can be navigated by visitor in a wheelchair, provided it uses the proper combination of stone size, binder, and compaction processes.

  1

  Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.