Roadside soil plays a crucial role in stormwater management. Naturally vegetated roadsides can filter and control runoff, helping to keep pollutants out of bodies of water and minimizing flooding to communities. However, soil left behind from road construction does not adequately support filtration and plant growth unless it’s amended with organic matter—and traditional mixtures for doing so, such as with sand and compost, can be costly and resource-intensive.
To find a more sustainable solution, U of M researchers partnered with MnDOT and the Minnesota Local Road Research Board. Building on previous research, a team led by CTS scholar David Saftner, principal investigator and associate professor in the UMD Department of Civil Engineering, tested sustainable roadside soil mixtures using locally available waste materials and by-products generated from forestry, agriculture, and industrial activities.
In this project, nine materials were selected for testing, including a peat/biochar mix; dredged river sediment; pine and ash sawdust; VersaLime (a by-product of sugar beet processing); lime mud, bottom ash, and degritter (from a pulp and paper mill); and recycled concrete aggregate (RCA). All nine materials proved efficient at removing pollutants, though some were more effective than others. After extensive laboratory testing, the five top-performing materials were selected and used to create three engineered soil blends:
- RCA (80%) and ash sawdust (20%)
- RCA (80%) and peat/biochar (20%)
- Dredge sediment (80%) and degritter (20%)
Field testing of these three engineered soil blends took place in outdoor plots. The team studied infiltration rate, pollutant removal, and plant growth from grass and flower seed. Through a life-cycle assessment, the researchers also evaluated material collection and transport, energy demand, human health and ecosystem impacts, climate change, and water use.
Their research revealed that all three engineered soil blends were effective at capturing and filtering the first inch of excess stormwater runoff, offering a viable alternative to traditional soil mixes. Other key findings:
- Of the engineered soil mixes, organic and coarser materials were better at allowing water to pass through.
- Greenhouse tests showed promising plant growth, while field plots experienced challenges—possibly due to seasonal dryness.
- The dredge sediment and degritter soil mix had substantially higher impacts than the other two soil mixes as well as the most CO2 emissions.
- The RCA and ash sawdust soil mix had the lowest impacts, with the RCA and peat/biochar soil mix producing similar results.
Based on their findings, a design guide was developed for road engineers outlining best practices for using local by-products and waste materials to create engineered soil mixes while still adhering to regulatory standards. These recommendations are designed to be standard, common, and repeatable.
“This was a great project and I'm especially happy with the design guide,” Saftner says. “Determining how to implement new procedures is tougher than using tried-and-true methods. Our hope is that the guide will simplify things for practicing engineers looking for more cost-effective, sustainable, and locally sourced solutions.”
The study results also highlighted many of the benefits of engineered soil mixtures including the reuse of waste materials, reduced spending on sand and compost, lower transportation costs, and fewer environmental impacts of transporting material.
Further research on the reuse of waste materials includes another multi-phased project incorporating biochar. The first phase of that project should be finished this summer, with the second phase kicking off in summer 2026.
—Krysta Rzeszutek, CTS digital editor
