Two infiltrating low impact development (LID) practices configured in series, pervious concrete and bioretention (PC‐B), were monitored for 17 months to examine the hydrologic and water quality response of this LID treatment train design. For the first LID practice, 0.53 ha of pervious concrete was installed to treat direct rainfall and run‐on from 0.36 ha of asphalt parking lot. The pervious concrete was installed over a gravel subsurface storage basin, which was designed to store 25 mm (1 in) of runoff from the parking lot before draining into the second LID practice — a 0.05 ha bioretention cell. The bioretention cell was conventionally drained, had a media depth of 0.5 m (1.6 ft), and was constructed at a location with a high water table. Outflow was only generated in 33 out of 80 monitored events, and over the course of the entire monitoring period, the total outflow volume reduction was 69 percent. The large outflow reduction subsequently led to high pollutant load reductions for total nitrogen (49%), total phosphorus (51%), and total suspended solids (89%). However, when the contribution of baseflow was included in the calculation, the total nitrogen load discharged from the bioretention cell was 64% higher than that of the runoff load because of nitrite and nitrate (NO2,3‐N) present in the baseflow. The total nitrogen (TN) loads of runoff, storm flow (total outflow minus baseflow), baseflow, and outflow (total) were 7.70, 3.94, 8.69, and 12.64 kg/ha/yr, respectively. Of the 8.69 kg/ha/yr TN in the baseflow, 92 percent was in the form of NO2,3‐N. This study demonstrated the hydrologic benefits (peak flow and outflow reduction) gained by having two infiltration LID practices in series. When compared to a single treatment practice (bioretention) that was monitored at the same site, the LID practices in series treated an additional ten percent of annual runoff volume, discharged approximately one‐half as much outflow volume, and discharged significantly lower peak outflow rates. However, the water quality results were not as promising due to the influx of groundwater in the bioretention cell and the lack of denitrifying conditions in either the bioretention cell or pervious concrete system. This study also quantified increased TN and NO2,3‐N export to surface waters from a bioretention cell that was sited in an area with a high water table.