Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

:
Mitigating Fugitive Dust with Vegetation
University of Michigan: Urban and Regional Planning April 2008

University of Michigan - Urban and Regional Planning Program 2007-2008 Capstone Project Team Students William Brodnax Mark Hansford Tyler Kinley Carolyn Pivirotto Shilpy Singh Jeff Storrar Benjamin Stupka Erin Thoresen Jonathan VanDerZee Faculty Eric Dueweke Larissa Larsen

Acknowledgements

The University of Michigan graduate student capstone wishes to extend our appreciation to Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision and the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments for providing support and direction for this community project: • Lisa Goldstein, SDEV Executive Director • Angela Riess, Environmental Planner, SEMCOG • Joan Weidner, Senior Planner, Transportation Programs, SEMCOG In addition, we wish to thank the following individuals and organizations for the valuable assistance they provided toward the successful completion of this project: • Ann Burns, SEMCOG • Jason Cousino, DTE Energy • Margaret Dewar, Urban and Regional Planning Program, University of Michigan • Christopher Dick, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan • James Earl, Severstal North America • Billy Gallegos, City of Albuquerque • Roger Gaudette, Ford Motor Company • Jen Green, Spatial and Numeric Services Librarian, University of Michigan • MaryCarol Hunter, School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan • Susan Katsiyiannis, City of Dearborn • Jerry Krawiec, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality • Frank Marsik, Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic, and Space Sciences, University of Michigan • Kent Murray, Department of Natural Sciences, University of Michigan – Dearborn • David Nowak, Urban Forests, Human Health, and Environmental Quality, State University of New York • Roberta Urbani, DTE Energy

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Table of Contents

Executive Summary.......................................................................................... 1 Section 1: Introduction..................................................................................... 3 Section 2: Fugitive Dust and Particulate Matter............................................ 7 Section 3: Context............................................................................................. 11 Geographic Description......................................................................... 11 History, Culture, and Community........................................................... 12 Detroit Metropolitan Area......................................................... 12 Southwest Detroit...................................................................... 13 Southeastern Dearborn............................................................. 14 Project Area Demographics................................................................... 14 Biophysical............................................................................................. 15 Health Implications................................................................................. 16 Section 4: Understanding Air Quality Regulations....................................... National Regulations.............................................................................. State Regulation and Control................................................................. Michigan Fugitive Dust Regulations......................................... Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act .............. Fugitive Dust Regulations in Michigan’s SIP............................ Additional Fugitive Dust Rules in Michigan.............................. Section 5: Fugitive Dust and Particulate Matter Sources............................. Major Stationary Sources....................................................................... National Regulations for Major Stationary Sources.................. Local Regulations for Major Stationary Sources...................... Stationary Source Inventory................................................................... Major Mobile Sources............................................................................ National Regulations for Mobile Sources................................. 23 23 24 25 26 28 28 31 32 32 34 34 37 37

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

Local Regulations for Mobile Sources...................................... Mobile Source Inventory........................................................................ New Bridges.............................................................................. Truck Routes............................................................................ Trucking Facilities.................................................................................. Fugitive Dust Sources............................................................................ Unregulated Facilities............................................................... Source Selection....................................................................... Additional Considerations......................................................... Section 6: Strategies for Mitigating Fugitive Dust........................................ Mechanical Solutions and Standard Practice........................................ Bioengineering and Vegetation.............................................................. The Role of Vegetation in Removing Air Pollution................................. Mechanisms of Pollution Removal............................................ Quantification of PM10 Removal by Vegetation......................... Species Specific........................................................................ Location Specific.......................................................................

38 38 38 39 39 40 40 40 41 45 46 50 51 51 52 53 54

Section 7: Implementation of Mitigation Strategies...................................... 59 Site Characteristics................................................................................ 60 Soil Characteristics................................................................................ 61 Climate................................................................................................... 63 Plant Selection and Plant List................................................................ 64 Site Selection Process........................................................................... 65 Site #1: Mellon/Dix................................................................................ 67 Site #46: Ormond St/Luther St.............................................................. 68 Site #47: Pleasant St/Beatrice St.......................................................... 69 Site #49: Marion Ave............................................................................. 70 Section 8: Conclusion....................................................................................... 73 Bibliography....................................................................................................... 75 Appendix A: Health Research.......................................................................... 83 Appendix B: Plant List..................................................................................... 85 Appendix C: Invasive Species......................................................................... 99 Appendix D: Stormwater Research................................................................. 101 Appendix E: Site Inventory..............................................................................110 Appendix F: Community Partners...................................................................112

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Executive Summary

This project focuses on mitigating the impact of coarse particulates such as fugitive dust by using bioengineering strategies that incorporate the use of vegetation. The use of vegetation is a practical and cost-effective land use practice that can help suppress airborne particulates, thus improving local air quality. Although this report makes frequent reference to particulate matter (PM), the recommended bioengineering strategies center on mitigating the impacts from unregulated sources of fugitive dust including industrial facilities and activities, unpaved and barren land, or unwashed roadways. Although much of the American landscape is now categorized as post-industrial, pockets of intense industrial activity remain. One of the most concentrated pockets of heavy industrial manufacturing in the United States exists in Southeast Michigan at the confluence of Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn. Fugitive dust is a prominent source of ambient air pollution in this area and it emanates from numerous unpaved lots, storage piles, and rail yards. In 2004, the United States Environmental Protection Agency designated the seven-county Southeast Michigan region as a non-attainment area for the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standard. A three-mile airshed buffer around each of the two air monitors recording the highest PM levels in the area defines our project boundaries. Public health studies increasingly warn that exposure to ambient particulate matter has significant health implications. In addition to employees of industrial facilities, approximately 152,000 nearby residents are constantly exposed to elevated particulate levels. Federal and state authorities are working with the largest industries to implement technical solutions to mitigate stationary stack emissions and initiate fugitive dust management strategies. However, within the project area there are many smaller industries and transportation companies that contribute to the fugitive dust problem but are not regularly monitored. The goal of this project is to identify long-term interventions that will reduce fugitive dust with bioengineering techniques that

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

1

can be used at large industrial sources as well as smaller and less regulated sources. To achieve this, university students and faculty worked with the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, and Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, a local grassroots environmental justice organization. This report provides an overarching framework for mitigating fugitive dust using vegetation. It demonstrates the effectiveness of vegetation as a longterm strategy to manage fugitive dust. Vegetation may be used to supplement shorter-term mechanical solutions that primarily block or suppress dust. Specifically, vegetation reduces fugitive dust by absorbing and filtering airborne particulates, reducing local temperature variability, and blocking wind and airborne particles. In order to demonstrate these strategies in practice, this report identifies a number of specific bioengineering techniques that can be used on a variety of sites. Each of these techniques is designed to maximize the effectiveness of vegetation in dust mitigation. They may be used not only as described for particular sites within the study area, but can also serve as templates for sites in areas where fugitive dust poses health risks outside of Southeast Michigan. This report is divided into several sections. The first is an overview that describes particulate matter and fugitive dust and also provides a context for the project by describing the history and demographics of Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn. The second section discusses the health implications of exposure to fugitive dust, highlighting its effects on cardiovascular and respiratory systems. Third, the report outlines particulate and fugitive dust regulations, which provide an understanding of the legal framework that governs particulate pollution. The fourth section includes an inventory of particulate matter sources in the project area. Fifth, the report describes specific mitigation strategies, including both mechanical and vegetative solution and how they are effective. Finally, the last section includes area-specific implementation plans. This section contains potential demonstration sites and examples of vegetative strategies. It also references a comprehensive plant list located in the appendix. Additionally, the plan identifies community partners who are likely to fund, install, and maintain these initiatives and disseminate information to residents and business owners.

2

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

1

Introduction

Although much of the American landscape is now categorized as post-industrial, pockets of intense industrial activity remain. One of the most concentrated pockets of heavy industrial manufacturing in the United States exists in Southeast Michigan at the confluence of SouthSalina Elementary School, Detroit west Detroit and Southeastern Source: salina-int.dearbornschools.org Dearborn. Contrary to other industrial pockets, facilities in this area are expanding. From an air quality perspective, stationary sources and mobile source pollution from vehicles are significant generators of air pollution, specifically particulate matter (PM) and fugitive dust. While state and federal agencies regularly monitor and regulate PM, fugitive dust is often overlooked. Fugitive dust and particulate matter are environmental hazards with serious health implications for local residents and employees. Fugitive dust and PM are terms used to describe a group of solid particles and liquid droplets of various size, shape, and chemical composition that can be suspended in the lower atmosphere for days or weeks.1 These particulates can originate from storage piles and unpaved roads or from stationary and mobile sources in the form of stack and auto emissions. High concentration levels in the area are caused by the clustering of industrial facilities, transportation infrastructure, and an abundance of fugitive dust sources. In addition, natural meteorological processes can further exacerbate air pollution, endangering human health and the environment. Public health and environmental studies increasingly warn of the adverse

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

3

impacts associated with these pollutants. Statistics from the Detroit area indicate that exposure to particulates can induce negative health effects in the pulmonary, respiratory, and cardiovascular systems.2 Young children, individuals suffering from respiratory illnesses, and the elderly are most at risk for pollution induced health complications, resulting in additional emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and even death.3 Studies also show that fugitive dust and PM negatively impact natural habitats and ecosystems. Particles that settle on soil and water can alter the nutrient and chemical balance that plants and animals need to survive. The project area is defined by 3-mile air-shed buffers around two Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) air monitors located at Detroit’s Southwestern High School and Salina Elementary School in Dearborn (see Figure 1). Industrial facilities in the area include, but are not limited to, coal-fired utilities, municipal waste incinerators, sewage sludge incinerators, refineries, iron/steel manufacturers, coke ovens, and chemical plants.4 This is also the site of the busiest United States–Canada border crossing for trucks.5 With the addition of a proposed second bridge from Windsor to Detroit in the area, traffic across the United States-Canada border at this location is projected to increase.6 In addition, several local facilities are planning expansion projects that will increase traffic volumes throughout the area and
Figure 1: 3-Mile Air-Shed Buffers Defining Project Area

4

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

potentially generate additional mobile source pollution. The combination and concentration of these activities will likely exacerbate the particulate pollution problem, including fugitive dust. Federal and state authorities are working with the largest industries to implement technical solutions to mitigate stationary stack emissions and initiate fugitive dust management strategies. However, located within the project area are many smaller industries and transportation companies that contribute to the fugitive dust problem but are not regularly monitored. Because of the adverse health and environmental effects, several forms of PM are regulated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to meet annual and daily National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act. In 2004, the EPA designated the sevencounty Southeastern Michigan region as a non-attainment area for the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standard. The Southwestern High School and Salina Elementary School air monitoring stations exceed the PM2.5 annual arithmetic mean standard of 15µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter), with measurements of 16.4µg/m3 and 18.2µg/m3 respectively.7 Through traditional regulatory processes and creative mitigation strategies, MDEQ and Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) are working to bring the region into attainment by 2010.8 Ensuring environmentally healthy neighborhoods is an important goal for residents of Southeast Michigan.9 To this end, University of Michigan graduate students and faculty in collaboration with Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision (SDEV), a local grassroots environmental non-profit, and SEMCOG propose supplementing current regulatory processes with a set of bioengineering strategies to mitigate fugitive dust and particulate matter in Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn. The use of vegetation is a practical and cost-effective land use practice that can aid in suppressing airborne particulates, thus improving the local environment for all. This report provides a framework for how to implement appropriate bioengineering strategies at prioritized sites throughout the area.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

5

Ahrens, D. (2003). Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc.
2 Keeler G. J., Dvonch T., Yip F., Parker E. A., Israel B. A., Marsik F. J., et al. (2002) Assessment of personal and community-level exposures to particulate matter among children with asthma in Detroit, Michigan, as part of Community Action Against Asthma (CAAA). Environmental Health Perspective 110(2),173–181.

1

Michigan Department of Community Health. (2002). Preventable Hospitalizations and Rates per 10,000 Population for Patients under 18 Years of Age by Selected Leading Diagnoses, 1996–2000. Lansing, MI: Division for Vital Records and Statistics. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Retrieved February 3, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/midwestcleandiesel/sectors/border/index.html.
5 United States Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Retrieved February 3, 2008from http:// www.epa.gov/midwestcleandiesel/sectors/border/index.html. 4

3

United States Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Retrieved February 3, 2008from http:// www.epa.gov/midwestcleandiesel/sectors/border/index.html.
7 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (2006). Retrieved November 18, 2007 from http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deq-aqd-air-reports-05AQReport.pdf.

6

State of Michigan. Department of Environmental Quality (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (draft). Lansing, MI.
9 City of Detroit (2004). Retrieved February 21, 2008, from http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/plandevl/ advplanning/pdfs/MPlan/MPlan_2004/Master%20Plan%20Revision%20-%20Citywide%20Policies.pdf.

8

6

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

2

Fugitive Dust and Particulate Matter

Particulate matter is a term used to describe a group of solid particles and liquid droplets of various size, shape, and chemical composition that can be suspended in the lower atmosphere for days or even weeks. The EPA categorizes PM as pollution from both primary and secondary sources. Primary particles are “emitted directly from a source” including dust and dirt from unpaved roads, barren fields, wood burning stoves, or fires.1 Secondary particles are formed through the reaction of chemicals, mainly sulfur dioxides and nitrogen oxides, in the atmosphere. These are usually emitted from industrial smokestacks and automobiles, particularly diesel fueled commercial vehicles. This project focuses on primary particles that form fugitive dust. MDEQ defines fugitive dust in two ways. Section R336.1106(k) of the Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules defines fugitive dust as “particulate matter which can originate from indoor or outdoor industrial or commercial processes, activities, or operations and is emitted into the outer air through building openings and general exhaust ventilation.”2 Fugitive dust is more broadly defined as PM that comes from unintended activities including “soil disturbances by wind or from human activities such as walking or driving through an unpaved parking lot.”3
Figure 2: Size of Particulate Matter

Particle size is the determinant for PM regulations because “the size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing health problems.”4 Air quality regulations regulate two sizes of PM (see Figure 2): PM10, particulate matter that is 10 micrometers in diameter or less, and PM2.5, particulate matter that is 2.5

Source: EPA Office of Research and Development

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

7

micrometers in diameter or less. PM2.5 is generally considered ‘fine particles,’ while PM10 is generally considered ‘inhalable coarse particles.’ This project is focused on mitigating the impact of inhalable coarse particles, or PM10 and higher, because they are the primary components of fugitive dust generated by industrial facilities and unpaved or unwashed roadways. Along with anthropogenic activities, natural meteorological processes such as precipitation, wind patterns, and atmospheric stability influence particulate pollution concentrations. Precipitation acts to cleanse the air of particulates as cloud droplets and ice crystals form around airborne particulates and fall to the ground in the form or rain or snow. Wind patterns determine how quickly pollutants mix with the surrounding air and where they will settle on the ground. Strong winds quickly dilute dirty air in the surrounding cleaner air, while lighter winds lead to less atmospheric mixing and a greater concentration of pollutants. Atmospheric stability determines whether air masses will mix horizontally or vertically. Meteorological research suggests that “normal changing atmospheric stability, from stable in the early morning to conditionally unstable in the afternoon, can have a profound effect on the daily concentrations of pollution.”5 A stable atmosphere generally resists vertical air movement, instead spreading pollutants horizontally in the lower atmosphere. The worst air pollution often occurs in stable atmospheres when atmospheric stagnation dominates, combining light winds with poor vertical mixing.

8

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Retrieved February 15, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/basic.html.
2 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2007). Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3310_4148-11396--,00.html. 3 4

1

Ibid.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/health.html. Ahrens, D. (2003). Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc.
5

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

9

10

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

3

Context

Geography The project area is located in Southeast Michigan (see Figure 3). The sevencounty region includes Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties and is home to the majority of the state’s population and economic activity. Interstates 94 and 75 and several rail lines connect the area to northern Michigan and the Midwest. The eastern boundary of the region is the Detroit River, which forms the international border with Canada.
Figure 3: Southeast Michigan Context Map

Detroit, located on the banks of the Detroit River in Wayne County, is the state’s largest city. The city and its metropolitan area encompass many diverse neighborhoods. The project area is located a few miles southwest of

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

11

downtown Detroit and is defined by 3-mile air-shed buffers surrounding two MDEQ air monitoring stations located at Southwestern High School in Detroit and Salina Elementary School in Dearborn. The air-shed buffers contain portions of several municipalities, including Detroit, Dearborn, Melvindale, River Rouge, and Windsor, Canada. The bioengineering strategies outlined in this report are tailored to Southeastern Michigan neighborhoods. History, Culture, and Community Detroit Metropolitan Area Settled by the French in 1701 and changing hands multiple times throughout its early history, the City of Detroit was incorporated as the new capital of the Michigan Territory in 1815. The Detroit region grew throughout the 19th century as a shipping, shipbuilding, and manufacturing center.1 Detroit became an immigrant city, attracting Germans, Irish, Greeks, Italians, Poles, Serbs, Croats, and others with a variety of labor and trade opportunities. The population and economic activity rapidly increased during the Industrial Revolution and Detroit quickly became one of the busiest ports in the world. Laborers from Europe and throughout America moved to the region as Detroit expanded upward and outward. Population and economic growth surged with the invention and success of the automobile, and Detroit’s growth mirrored that success, incorporating automotive manufacturing and associated heavy industrial plants into its economic base. Four major automobile manufacturers including Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Chrysler, and American Motors, established their headquarters in Detroit’s metropolitan area in the early 20th century. By the mid-20th century Detroit had become a major commercial center of the Midwest and, arguably, the transportation center of the world. As jobs became increasingly mobile and market competition increased, the auto industry began to decline in the latter half of the 20th century. The region’s economic dependence on the automobile industry, coupled with racial tensions, brought extensive unemployment, segregation, and crime to the city. Population rapidly declined as people and businesses migrated to suburban neighborhoods, leading to the physical, economic, and social deterioration of Detroit’s central city. In recent years, the Big Three automakers’ loss of market shares to foreign competition has led to further economic hardship in the region. The SEMCOG Economic and Demographic Outlook for SE Michigan Through 2035 describes the region’s economy as being “in the midst of an economic crisis—probably the worst in our lifetime.” The crux of Detroit’s struggle is the recent restructuring of the auto makers, specifically Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors, whose market share has dropped from a high of 72.6 percent in 1995 to the current 2008 level of 49.4 percent, with a “mod12 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

est downward drift” as the most probable future. The location quotient, which measures the concentration of a particular business sector in a local area compared to that of the nation as a whole, shows that the area’s auto manufacturing is 7.8, reflecting a concentration 7.8 times greater than the national average. Although long considered a manufacturing center, the manufacturing location quotient for Southeastern Michigan without the auto industry drops to .78, which is far below the national average. This clearly highlights the region’s strong dependence on this industry. Regional job growth within the past 10 years has also been weak, and SEMCOG projects that this trend will continue in the coming years, but with certain areas of the economy showing modest promise. Employment in government and health care surpassed that provided by the auto industry, and has grown every year since 2001.2 The woes of the auto industry are projected to continue in the near-term as economic restructuring continues, although SEMCOG forecasts stabilization after 2012. Despite economic uncertainty, the Southeast Michigan region continues to function as the economic center of the state and remains home to nearly 4.5 million people. Communities located within the project area, specifically Southwest Detroit, Southeastern Dearborn, Melvindale, and River Rouge, are defined in large part by bluecollar ethnic neighborhoods dependent upon the nearby manufacturing jobs and local entrepreneurship. Southwest Detroit In the late 1800s Southwest Detroit was home to a wide array of industries attracted by the easy access to the Detroit River and to the railroad lines located in the district. Interestingly, salt (found in the subterranean salt beds beneath Detroit) was a major factor in the rapid industrialization of this area, and sparked a salt-based chemical industry on and near Zug Island. During this time, twelve of Detroit’s twenty largest manufacturing companies were located in Southwest Detroit. Small industries and manufacturers supported the larger manufacturing companies. Technical skills and knowledge gained by employees at these companies were key elements in the early success of the auto industry. Despite Detroit’s economic decline over the past several decades, Southwest Detroit continues to attract immigrants whose businesses spur economic activity and contribute to a sense of community. Located two miles outside of downtown and reflecting the large, concentrated Latino population, Southwest Detroit is home to a neighborhood often referred to as “Mexicantown.” Attracted by an abundance of jobs and reasonably priced housing, immigrants from the Jalisco region in Mexico have been making their way to Detroit since the 1920s, with immigration rates increasing since the midtwentieth century. While the construction of an expressway through Mexicantown during the 1970s would have split the neighborhood in two, additional immigration during this time helped to maintain the area’s economic vitality.
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 13

In the early 1900s, twelve of Detroit’s twenty largest manufacturing companies were located in Southwest Detroit.

Estimates indicate that the most recent wave added 20,000 people to the neighborhood.3 Mexicantown is home to “some of the strongest neighborhood commercial districts in the city” and the Latino population is considered the key economic force behind the neighborhood’s strength, as indicated by few empty storefronts and recent construction projects along Bagley Street and West Vernor Highway, the two main commercial corridors.4 Southeastern Dearborn Dearborn was incorporated as a city in 1927 and quickly merged with the Springwells neighborhood to form its current boundaries. Starting in the late 1940s, and influenced by Middle Eastern economic and political conditions, Dearborn attracted Arabic immigrants with job opportunities offered at Michigan’s automobile factories, particularly the Ford Motor Company’s Rouge River plant.5 Once a destination for families fleeing downtown Detroit in the 1960s, Southeastern Dearborn experienced a rapid influx of Arab immigrants and is now home to the largest concentration of Arab-Americans in the United States.6 Dearborn’s Arabic population maintains its cultural identity through steady immigration, a strong sense of community, and cultural anchors such as the Dearborn Mosque, which was the second mosque built in the United States.7 The city is also home to the Islamic Center of America—the largest mosque in North America. Much like Southwest Detroit, Southeastern Dearborn relies on the strength of its immigrant community through tough economic times. For instance, the Dearborn area witnessed a 6.9 percent increase in employment from 1990 to 2000, and area forecasts estimate a 5.8 percent increase through 2035.8 Demographics The demographic composition of the project area is difficult to accurately identify because it encompasses multiple neighborhoods in several cities. Based on an analysis of 2000 U.S. Census data, the population in the project area is approximately 152,977.9 Figure 4 illustrates the population density in the project area. The populations that face the greatest health risks from exposure to PM and fugitive dust are those under 5 and over 65 years of age, as well as individuals that suffer from respiratory disease. About 20.5 percent of the area population, or 31,332 residents, fall into this demographic. A variety of races are represented within the study area. Approximately 56 percent of residents are white and about 20 percent are black. Additionally, about 27 percent of the total population identifies themselves as Latino. It is important to note that while 75 percent of Southeastern Dearborn is white, this statistic belies the fact that about 30 percent of Dearborn’s population is Arabic.10 It is also noteworthy that while the City of Detroit experienced a consistent population decline since the 1950s, specific neighborhoods in
14 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Southeastern Dearborn is home to the largest concentration of ArabAmericans in the United States

The populations that face the greatest health risks from exposure to PM and fugitive dust are those under 5 and over 65 years of age, as well as individuals that suffer from respiratory disease.

the study area have experienced population growth. Much of the Detroit portion of the study area falls into Cluster 5, an area designated by the City of Detroit’s Planning and Development Department. Within Cluster 5, the Springwells neighborhood population increased about 10 percent from 1990 to 2000. The Latino population in Cluster 5 doubled from 4,432 to 9,858 residents during this period.11 Additionally, between 1990 and 2000, the VernorJunction neighborhood (located in Cluster 5) experienced a population increase of 0.04 percent, while the Latino population grew by 61.2 percent.12
Figure 4: Population Density in Project Area

Approximately 57,661 total housing units exist in the project area. Of these, about 10 percent are vacant, 48 percent are owner-occupied, and 42 percent are renter-occupied. Much of the housing stock was constructed during the 1940s and the subsequent post-WWII housing boom to accommodate an expanding workforce. Today, approximately 35 percent of the jobs available in the project area are in blue-collar professions such as construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, transportation, and warehousing. Median household income is $28,364, considerably lower than the state level of $47,182 and the national level of $48,451.13 Biophysical Conditions The 32-mile Detroit River forms the eastern boundary of the project area and connects Lake Saint Clair and the upper Great Lakes with the lower Great Lakes. The river provides an important commercial shipping link in the Great Lakes and is a drinking water source for many Detroit Metro residents. However, the EPA designates the 607-square mile Detroit River watershed, including the 107-square mile City of Detroit sewershed, as an “Area of

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

15

Concern,” citing eleven beneficial use impairments due to “urban and industrial development in the watershed, bacteria, PCBs, PAHs, metals, oils and greases…[from] sewer overflows, municipal and industrial discharges…and stormwater runoff.”14 The Rouge River and Ecorse River tributaries meander westward through these highly urbanized watersheds in the metro area before draining into the Detroit River. In the early 1800s, coastal wetlands along the Detroit River shoreline were contiguous and nearly one mile wide on both sides of the river. They were described as a “pristine ‘paradise’ with abundant edible fruits, lush meadows, forests, fish, and wildlife.”15 Since then, the river ecosystem changed dramatically due to the level of development near the river and the hardening of the shoreline by pilings and breakwalls. Development now claims over 99 percent of the coastal wetlands that were once present in the early 1800s, resulting in the loss of habitat, natural flood control, erosion protection, and sediment removal.16 Efforts to restore the remaining wetlands threatened by development and pollution are ongoing. Tree canopy and open space in the area are rapidly declining due to development, disease, and poor maintenance, leading to an increase in stormwater runoff and declining air and water quality. In addition, Dutch Elm Disease and the Emerald Ash Borer destroyed much of the tree canopy over the past half century. Urbanization of land in the Rouge and Ecorse River Watersheds continues to increase faster than population.17 Isolated patches of green space and vacant and abandoned land scattered throughout the neighborhoods illustrate this trend. Health Implications of Particulate Air Pollution Epidemiological research shows that human exposure to PM has a number of adverse health impacts. Studies dating back to the 1970s consistently find that PM10 penetrates the defense mechanisms of the upper and middle regions of the respiratory tract.18 More recent evidence shows that human exposure to fine particles, such as PM2.5, may be even more of a concern. For instance, PM as large as 10 micrometers tends to impact the upper and middle regions of the respiratory tract, while PM2.5 micrometers and smaller is more likely to be inhaled deep into the lungs, making its way into the body’s lower respiratory system where it stays for long periods of time.19&20 PM2.5 also tends to be a greater concern because it can be more toxic due to its chemical composition. The health implications from exposure to PM include decreased lung function, more frequent asthma symptoms, increased asthma attacks, more frequent emergency department visits, additional hospital admissions, and increased numbers of deaths.21 Table 1 includes the EPA list of findings for health effects associated with exposure to fine and coarse particles.
Development now claims over 99 percent of the coastal wetlands that were once present along the Detroit River, resulting in the loss of habitat, natural flood control, erosion protection, and sediment removal.

16

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Table 1: Health Effects Associated with Exposure to Fine & Coarse Particles22 Short-term exposure to PM2.5 Premature death in disease Non-fatal heart attacks Increased hospital admissions, emergency room visits and doctor’s visits for respiratory diseases Increased hospital admission and ER visits for cardiovascular diseases Increased respiratory symptoms such as coughing, wheezing and shortness of breath Lung function changes, especially in children and people with lung disease such as asthma Changes in heart rate variability Irregular heartbeat Decreased lung function Increased respiratory symptoms in children Long-term exposure to PM2.5 Premature death in disease, including death from lung cancer Reduced lung function Development of chronic respiratory disease in children Hospital admissions for heart disease Increased hospital admissions and doctors’ visits for respiratory disease Short-term exposure to PM10 Premature death for those

people with heart and lung people with heart and lung with heart or lung disease

Research concludes that children are at greater risk from exposure to air pollution, including fine particles. This is primarily because (1) their bodies are still growing, (2) they take in a greater volume of air per pound of body weight than adults, and (3) they spend more time outdoors doing physical activities.23 The elderly and individuals with asthma also are at greater risk than middle-aged adults. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the distribution of childern and the elderly in the project area. In addition to having adverse impacts on the human respiratory system, recent research shows that PM may have adverse effects on the human cardiovascular system. Studies consistently find an association between cardiovascular hospital admissions, mortality, and outdoor air pollution, particularly concentrations of PM less than or equal to 2.5 or 10 micrometers in diameter.24 These studies support associations between PM and the risk of ischemia and arrhythmias, increased blood pressure, decreased heart rate variability, and increased circulating markers of inflammation of thrombosis,
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 17

Figure 5: Distribution of Population Age 5 and Under

Figure 6: Distribution of Population Age 65 and Over

all of which are markers of cardiovascular health.25 The components of PM that adversely impact the cardiovascular system are not entirely known. As a result, research has more recently focused on specific elements within PM to identify which elements—or interactions between elements—are contributing factors associated with compromised cardiovascular health. A number of these studies focus on the metals often found in PM. Using a population of 39 boilermakers, a recent study examined the effects of those metal

18

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

components used in industrial activities on the autonomic nervous system. The metals studied included vanadium, nickel, chromium, lead, copper, and manganese, all of which are common components of PM2.5. The authors observed a connection between exposure to the airborne metals and significant discrepancy in cardiac autonomic function.26 Although the U.S. maintains ambient air standards for PM10 and PM2.5, such health effects described above are often observed at levels below current U.S. National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate air pollution.27 Also of concern for the project area population are the chemical concentrations found in PM. Research suggests that the driving force behind the adverse cardiovascular health impacts may be the concentrations of airborne metals found in PM, many of which are carcinogenic. According to Wayne State University’s database (detroitkidsdata.org), carcinogenic air discharges for zip code 48209, which overlays a large portion of the project area, represent 69.6 percent of all carcinogenic discharges in the city.28
The Michigan Department of Community Health reports that hospitalization rate for asthma among children in Detroit is more than three times the statewide average.

Health statistics for the City of Detroit clearly demonstrate the negative effects of land use patterns in which residential homes are situated near concentrations of industrial facilities and activities. Fourteen percent of Detroit’s children have been diagnosed with asthma while an additional 14.3 percent go undiagnosed.29 According to the 2004 Detroit Health and Wellness Project report, chronic lower respiratory disease was one of the top five causes of death among children of all races/ethnicities ages 10 to 19 in Detroit during the 2003-2004 year. Furthermore, the Michigan Department of Community Health reports that hospitalization rate for asthma among children in Detroit is more than three times the statewide average.30 It is safe to say that if local residents continue to be exposed to the current PM and fugitive dust levels, their health and quality of life will continue to decline. Please see Appendix A for more information about the health implications of particulate matter exposure.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

19

1 2 3

The Columbia Encyclopedia. (2007). Detroit, City, United States. Sixth Edition. Ibid.

Bonisteel, S. (2007) Fox News, January 11, 2007, Retrieved March 3, 2008, from www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,243180,00.html.
4

Ibid.

5 Belton, P. In the Way of the Prophet: Ideologies and Institutions in Dearborn, Michigan, America’s Muslim Capitol, The Next American City, (3), Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http:// americancity.org/magazine/article/in-the-way-of-the-prophet-ideologies-and-institutions-belton/. 6 Arab American Institute, Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://www.aaiusa.org/foundation/358/arab-americans. 7 8

Ibid.

SEMCOG. (2003). Regional Development Forecast Community Detail Report. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from http://library.semcog.org/InmagicGenie/DocumentFolder/RegionalDevelopm entForecast_2030CommunityDetail.pdf.
9

U.S. Census. (2000). Retrieved March 2, 2008, from www.census.gov.

10

U.S. Census. (2003). The Arab Population: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. December 2003, Retrieved February 16, 2008 from http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-23.pdf.

11 City of Detroit, Master Plan. (2004). 5-11. Retrieved February 16, 2008 from http://www. ci.detroit.mi.us/plandevl/advplanning/pdfs/MPlan/MPlan_2004/Cluster5. 12 13 14

City of Detroit, Master Plan. (2004). Table 5-6. United States Census Bureau. (2006).

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Retrieved February 3, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/detroit.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Retrieved February 3, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/med/grosseile_site/indicators/wetlands.html. Ibid.

15

16 17

American Forests. (2006). Urban Ecosystem Analysis: SE Michigan and City of Detroit. Retrieved February 3, 2008 from http://americanforests.org/downloads/rea/AF_Detroit.pdf.

18

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Retrieved November 28, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/eogapti1/module6/matter/character/character.htm. Dockery, D., Pope, C., Xiping, X., Spengler, J. et al. (1993). An Association between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six U.S. Cities. New England Journal of Medicine, 329,1753-1759.

19

20

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Retrieved November 28, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/eogapti1/module6/matter/character/character.htm. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2004). Retrieved October 29, 2007 from http://cfpub2.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=87903. Ibid.

21

22 23

Ritchie, I. (2007). Effects of PM2.5 on Children’s Health in Indiana. Issue Paper for: Summit for Children’s Environmental Health at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. Retrieved November 1, 2007, from http://www.ceh.iu.edu/Documents/Fine%20Particles.pdf.

20

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

24

Delfino, R. J., Constantinos S., and Malik, S. (2005) Potential role of ultrafine particles in associations between airborne particle mass and cardiovascular health. Environmental Health Perspectives. 113.8(934),13. Ibid.

25 26

Magari, S., Schwartz, J., Williams, P., Hauser, R., Smith, T., Christiani, D. (2002). The association of particulate air metal concentrations with heart rate variability. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110, 875-879. Pope, C., Bates, D., and Raizenned, M. (1995). Health Effects of Particulate Air Pollution: Time for Reassessment? Environmental Health Perspectives, 103(5), 472-480. Detroit Kids Data. Retrieved November 7, 2007, from detroitkidsdata.org.

27

28 29

Lewis, T. C., Robins, T. G., Dvonch, J. T., Keeler, G. J., Fuyuen, Y. (2005). Air Pollution–Associated Changes in Lung Function among Asthmatic Children in Detroit. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(1068), 175. Michigan Department of Community Health. (2002). Preventable Hospitalizations and Rates per 10,000 Population for Patients under 18 Years of Age by Selected Leading Diagnoses, 1996–2000. Lansing, MI: Division for Vital Records and Statistics.

30

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

21

22

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

4

Understanding Air Quality Regulations for Particulate Matter and Fugivtive Dust

National Regulations and Control The 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act established National Ambient Air Quality Standards for six criteria pollutants: 1. particulate matter 2. ozone 3. lead 4. sulfur dioxide 5. carbon monoxide 6. nitrogen oxide Standards for these six pollutants were adopted because they are considered to be harmful to the public and environment. The Clean Air Act sets “primary” and “secondary” standards for criteria pollutants (see Table 2). Primary standards protect public health including “sensitive” populations, while secondary standards protect public welfare in terms of visibility, agricultural economy, and building stock. Regulations establish further distinctions within the primary and secondary standards for PM, including annual and 24-hour standards. The current standard for PM2.5 for a 24-hour period is 35 micrograms/cubic meter (µg/m3), while the annual standard is 15µg/ m3. The current 24-hour standard for PM10 is 150µg/m3; however, the annual standard has been revoked because “available evidence generally does not suggest a link between long-term exposure to current levels of coarse particles and health problems.”1 Standards for PM are based on an average of daily or yearly measurements. Annual PM2.5 standards are averaged over a three-year period and must not exceed 15µg/m3. 24-hour PM2.5 standards are also averaged over three years. The 98th percentile of this three-year average must not exceed 35µg/m3. The Clean Air Act requires states to have air quality monitoring stations that provide data used to produce air quality statistics. Air quality statistics are used to determine whether a geographical area complies with NAAQS.
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 23

Table 2: National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution2 Pollutant Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 µg/m3 Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 35 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 Primary Standards Revoked Annual (Arith. Mean) 24-hour Annual (Arith. Mean) 24-hour Same as Primary Averaging Times Secondary Standards

Particulate Matter Levels in Dearborn and Detroit MDEQ’s 2006 Annual Air Quality Report shows that the two monitoring stations in the study area measure at levels exceeding annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards.3 The Dearborn monitor shows the highest PM10 readings in the state at 31.3µg/m3. Consequently, the State of Michigan is required by the Clean Air Act to develop and adopt controls and strategies that will bring all non-attainment areas into compliance. The methods by which controls and strategies are identified for the EPA are incorporated in a State Implementation Plan (SIP).

State Regulation and Control The Clean Air Act requires every state to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP). An SIP contains the control measures and strategies to both attain and maintain NAAQS, including particulate matter in the form of fugitive dust.4 Typical elements of an SIP include state-issued and EPA-approved orders requiring pollution control at individual companies, federal air quality regulations, and planning documents such as area-specific compilations of emissions estimates and computer simulations demonstrating that the regulatory limits will provide timely compliance with NAAQS.5 The development of an SIP must follow a specific process. Every state is required to provide a public comment period for each proposed element within an SIP.6 Following public input, control measures and strategies are submitted to the EPA. Once submissions are approved by the EPA, they are incorporated into the federally approved SIP. Given the number of air quality elements required in an SIP by the Clean Air Act, the document is quite extensive. For example, required elements for PM include: air pollution control regulations; emission inventories; monitoring networks; attainment demonstrations; and enforcement mechanisms.7 Thus, an SIP is not one comprehensive document approved on a regular basis by the EPA. Instead, it is a living document which can be revised to address the unique air pollution problems in a given state. It should be noted that states do adopt air quality legislation that is not incor-

24

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

porated into an SIP. For instance, several of Michigan’s fugitive dust control rules are not incorporated in the state’s SIP. Michigan Fugitive Dust Regulation Michigan has specific rules associated with the generation and control of fugitive dust, a number of which are incorporated into Michigan’s SIP. Depending on the type of fugitive dust source, local air quality measurements, or the level of public concern, fugitive dust sources may be required to develop a fugitive dust program. A fugitive dust program “is an operating program […] designed to significantly reduce the fugitive dust emissions to the lowest level that a particular source is capable of achieving by the application of control technology that is reasonably available, based on technological and economic feasibility.”8 In addition to the fugitive dust provisions in Michigan’s SIP, the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act and Michigan Rule 336.1901 also provide specific rules associated with potential fugitive dust generating facilities. The following rules apply to fugitive dust sources in Wayne County: • Part 55 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994, as Amended – Section 324.2424—Fugitive Dust Sources & Emissions – Section 324.5525—Definitions • Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules – Section R 336.1371—Fugitive Dust Control Programs – Section R 336.1372—Fugitive Dust Control Methods – Section R 336.1901—Air Contaminants, prohibited These rules define three ways a facility or site may be required to develop a fugitive dust program. A fugitive dust program may be required if: 1. A potential fugitive dust generating activity is located within a designated nonattainment area (Section 324.2424) – This rule targets air polluting industrial facilities that are located in areas with excessive PM levels and that must obtain air pollution permits through MDEQ. 2. MDEQ determines that an area has excessive PM concentrations or receives a substantial number of complaints regarding fugitive dust emissions (Rule 336.1371) – This rule targets facilities and activities that process, use, store, transport, or convey bulk materials from a highly emitting dust source.

Depending on the type of fugitive dust source, local air quality measurements, or the level of public concern, fugitive dust sources may be required to develop a fugitive dust program.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

25

3. A fugitive dust source is determined to be a public nuisance (Rule 336.1901) – This rule targets a person that causes or allows air contamination in quantities that jeopardize the health and welfare of the public. Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act Requirements Section 324.5524, Part 55, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA) includes requirements for potential fugitive dust generating activities in nonattainment areas. Specifically, it requires that potential fugitive dust generating activities in designated nonattainment areas (1) adopt and implement fugitive dust programs and (2) meet certain opacity limits. The original intent of this measure was to help ensure areas that have been determined to not meet PM10 air quality standards effectively address the reduction of local PM levels. Facilities required to have fugitive dust programs include those with the following standard industrial classification (SIC) codes: • SIC 10-14—Mining Operations • SIC 20-39—Manufacturing Operations • SIC 40—Railroad Transportation • SIC 42—Motor Freight Transportation and Warehousing • SIC 491—Electric Services • SIC 495—Sanitary Services • SIC 496—Steam Supply Facilities that fall within one of these codes cannot cause or allow fugitive dust from a road, lot, or storage pile to reach an opacity measurement greater than 5 percent, as measured by EPA Protocol Reference Method 9D.9 In addition, Section R 325.5524 (2) states that any facility falling within these codes cannot cause or allow the emission of fugitive dust from any other fugitive dust source that has an opacity greater than 20 percent, as determined by test method 9D.10 This may include, for example, the handling of a bulk material storage pile, which constitutes an active storage pile. The NREPA also requires that these regulated facilities adopt suppression methods for particular fugitive dust activities. Typical fugitive dust generating activities and suppression methods recommended by MDEQ are outlined in Table 3.

26

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Table 3: Fugitive Dust Generating Activities and Suppression Methods11 Source Material Storage Pile Suppression Method Protect with cover, enclosed, sprayed with water or a surfactant solution, or treated by an equivalent method Conveyor loading operations to storage piles Batch loading operations from storage piles Unloading operations from storage piles Utilize spray systems, telescopic chutes, stone ladders, or other equivalent methods Utilize spray systems, limit drop heights, enclosures, or other equivalent methods Utilize rake reclaimers, bucket wheel reclaimers, underpile conveying, pneumatic conveying with baghouse, water sprays, gravity-feed plow reclaimers, front-end loaders with limited drop height, or other equivalent method Traffic pattern access areas surrounding storage piles and all traffic patterns roads and parking facilities Unloading and transporting operations equipment Crushers, grinding mills, screening operations, bucket elevators, conveyor transfer points, conveying bagging operations, storage bins, and fine product truck and railcar loading operations Spray with water or a surfactant solution, utilize choke-feeding, or equivalent method Utilize spraying, pelletizing, screw conof materials collected by pollution control veying, or other equivalent method Pave or treat with water, oils, or chemical dust suppressants

Although Section 324.5524 of the NREPA was originally adopted to reduce PM10 levels in nonattainment areas, its provisions are still used to control fugitive dust generating activities in Wayne County. As a result, these requirements are currently incorporated into the most commonly used method to regulate fugitive dust sources: the “Permit to Install” or the “New Source Review” process. For instance, compliance with NREPA is usually addressed during the air permitting process. In accordance with Michigan Rule 336.1201, a facility that has the potential to emit air pollution must go through the New Source Review process and “obtain a Permit to Install prior to the installation, construction, reconstruction, relocation, or modification of equipment that emits air contaminants.”12 The Permit to Install is a state license to emit air contamination into the ambient air. It provides a list of conditions with which the responsible person or company must comply. Conditions typically limit the emission of air contaminants, restrict hours of operation, limit the amount and type of raw material used, and require the operation

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

27

of air pollution control equipment.13 Based on the New Source Review, and applicable NREPA provisions, a facility within a nonattainment (or previously nonattainment) area may be required to include a fugitive dust program as a condition of the Permit to Install. Fugitive Dust Rules Included in Michigan’s SIP Statewide fugitive dust provisions are included in Part 3, Emissions Limitations and Prohibitions, of Michigan’s SIP. According to Michigan Rule 336.1371, in response to excessive PM measurements or a substantial number of complaints, the MDEQ may request a fugitive dust suppression program from a facility that processes, uses, stores, transports, or conveys bulk materials from a highly emitting dust source.14 Highly emitting dust sources include the loading and unloading of open storage piles, transporting bulk materials, outdoor conveying, construction, renovation, and demolition, inactive storage piles, building ventilations, roads and lots. Requirements for a fugitive dust program under Michigan Rule 336.1371 are provided in Michigan Rule 336.1372. The requirements are divided according to the type of fugitive dust generating activity or source, including: • Open storage piles of bulk material • Transporting of bulk materials • Outdoor conveying • Roads and lots • Inactive storage piles • Building ventilation • Construction, renovation, or demolition Fugitive dust programs under Michigan Rule 336.1371 are reviewed and approved by MDEQ. After approval of the program, responsible parties must maintain the control schedule documented in the program. Fugitive dust programs can be revised if facility circumstances change. Additional Michigan Fugitive Dust Rules While not included in the fugitive dust section of Michigan’s SIP, Michigan Rule 336.901 also applies to the control of fugitive dust. Michigan Rule 336.901 states that a person cannot cause or permit air contamination in quantities that cause (a) injurious effects to human health or safety, animal life, plant life of significant value, or property or (b) unreasonable interference with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property.

28

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Final Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution (Particulate Matter).
2

1

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2008). Retrieved January 31, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/standards.html.

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2006) Annual Air Quality Report. 27-35. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from http://michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-aqd-air-reports06AQReport_216544_7.pdf. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans. Retrieved December 12, 2007, from http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/ EPA-AIR/2006/September/Day-06/a14708.htm. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (n.d.). State Implementation Plan Overview. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3310_30151_3 0154---,00.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Michigan; Revised Format of 40 CFR Part 52 for Materials Being Incorporated by Reference. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAAIR/2006/September/Day-06/a14708.htm.
7 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Particulate Matter2.5. Retrieved February 11, 2008, from http://michigan.gov/documents/ deq/deq-aqd-air-aqe-sip-pm25-1-14-08_223446_7.pdf. 8 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2005). Managing Fugitive Dust: A Guide for Compliance with the Air Regulatory Requirements for Particulate Matter Generation. 9 6 5 4

3

Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.

10 11 12

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2007). Air Quality Regulations. Retrieved January 23, 2008, from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-ess-p2tasFVGuidech1_199604_7.pdf. Ibid Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2005).

13 14

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

29

30

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

5

Fugitive Dust and Particulate Matter Sources

Fugitive dust pollution can come from a variety of sources. Consequently, it is often difficult to identify the direct source of fugitive dust because it can consist of any activity, process, or unintended consequence that produces unaccounted for PM. Examples of these unintended emissions include an automobile driving on an unpaved or dirt-covered roadway, a strong wind blowing uncontrolled soil from a large bulk material storage pile, or a heavy commercial vehicle exiting a construction or unpaved industrial site. In addition, emission can occur from a variety of land uses including major industrial sites, public roadways, or private residential properties. While some of the largest major sources in Michigan are required to implement fugitive dust programs, a significant number of dust generating facilities and activities go unmonitored and untreated. This report identifies many of these facilities and activities in the project area and suggests mitigation strategies to help reduce PM levels. This report also identifies major stationary and mobile sources of PM in the area. This is a necessary step in mitigating fugitive dust because it helps identify facilities that are likely to have implemented a fugitive dust program required by Michigan air quality provisions. Additionally, a clear understanding of current PM generation in the area helps guide the most effective long-term mitigation strategies. For instance, a number of industrial facilities in the area plan to expand their operations over the next several years. Focusing mitigation strategies in close proximity to these areas may prove ineffective once expansion projects take place and facilities and surrounding landscape are altered. It is important to acknowledge that state and federal air quality regulations provide the framework for monitoring and mitigating PM2.5 and PM10 from major stationary and mobile sources. Consequently, this report does not specifically recommend or solicit amendments to existing air quality regulations for these facilities. However, because it is important to understand the rules that apply to the generation of PM in relation to fugitive dust, the changes to these regulations are outlined in the following section.
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 31

In February 2008, MDEQ issued a draft version of the State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5).1 The draft outlines both national and local controls designed to ensure that PM2.5 in the region and, particularly in the project area, will meet the 24-hour and annual NAAQS standards. The document states that the controls will contribute to a downward trend in PM emissions in the entire region, and particularly the monitors in the project area. Using air quality monitoring data, MDEQ and SEMCOG reviewed local conditions, evaluated the implementation of adopted controls, and have determined that the area will meet NAAQS for PM2.5 by 2010. The following section provides an overview of the major PM stationary sources, mobile sources, and the significant changes taking place, as well as the efforts currently underway to reduce PM levels in the project area. Most importantly, it identifies potential fugitive dust sources. Major Stationary Sources There are 42 major stationary sources of PM in the project area (see Figure 7 and associated table). These sources are generally industrial facilities, including large facilities like the Marathon Oil Refinery and Severstal Steel. Currently, 29 percent of the land in the project area is classified as industrial activity, equivalent to approximately 20,600 acres. While industrial facilities in the area emit a variety of chemicals, including known air toxics that result in the formation of secondary PM (sulfur dioxides and nitrogen oxides), they also emit a substantial amount of primary PM. According to MDEQ, the major stationary facilities who have obtained air pollution permits in the area contributed to at least 1,234,392 pounds of PM10 and 323,551 pounds of PM2.5 in 2004.2 National Regulations for Major Stationary Sources The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) is a national level program that works to significantly reduce sulfates and nitrates through the use of a cap-and-trade pollution reduction approach. Adopted in 2004, CAIR requires states to make major reductions in air pollution from all major stationary sources by 2015. The two options that a state has to comply with CAIR regulations are to require “power plants to participate in an EPA administered interstate cap-andtrade program”, or to allow “power plants to meet an individual state emissions budget through measures of the state’s own design.”3 According to the EPA, CAIR will produce $85 to $100 billion in annual health benefits, prevent 17,000 premature deaths annually, reduce millions of lost work and school days, and reduce tens of thousands of non-fatal heart attacks and hospital
Currently, 29 percent of the land in the project area is classified as industrial activity, equivalent to approximately 20,600 acres.

32

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Figure 7: Point Source Map

Key for Point Source Map Site # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Source Comprehensive Environmental Solutions Darling International Inc Dearborn Industrial Generation BP Products North America DTE River Rouge Power Plant US Steel Great Lakes Works Carmeuse/River Rouge Detroit WWTP Ford Motor Co Ford Motor River Rouge Complex Ford Elm St Boiler House Severstal DTE Delray Power Plant St Mary’s Cement Detroit Public Lighting - Mistersky Power Magni Industries Spartan Industrial Equilon Enterprises Owens Corning Trumbull Div Cadillac Asphalt Products Site # 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Source Sunoco Inc Marathon Ashland Petroleum US Gypsum Company BASF Corporation Crown Plating Co Honeywell National Steel Corp Fritz Products Fabricon Products EDW C Levy DO Plant 6 Detroit Salt Detroit Electro-Coatings Company IPMC Aquisition LLC EDW C Levy Plant 1 Reily Plating/Mlok Incorporated Kasle Steel Corp Ferrous Environmental Recycling Corp Coca Cola Bottling Co Hispanic MFG/Gonzalez MFG Carmeuse/Detroit Lime Daimler Chrysler - McGraw

Ford Motor Company - R&E and Elm St PP 33

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

33

admissions by year 2015.4 According to MDEQ’s draft version of the State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), the implementation of CAIR “will result in major reductions of sulfates and nitrates, two of the most significant contributors to PM2.5 at monitors showing violations of the standards throughout the nonattainment area.”5 Local Regulations for Major Stationary Sources The strategy in the State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) to bring the project area into attainment for PM2.5 includes local controls for specific facilities. Three facilities, Severstal Steel, U.S. Steel, and the Marathon Petroleum Company, will be required to undergo local controls to reduce PM2.5 production. MDEQ chose these facilities because they emit the highest levels of PM and because they are especially close to the air quality monitors reporting levels that exceed NAAQS standards. Data from MDEQ’s draft version of the State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) indicates that “significant amounts of PM2.5 likely come predominantly from local upwind industrial sources, and that control of these sources, primarily the nearby steel mill (Severstal), will bring the area into attainment of the annual PM2.5 standard by 2010.”6 Consequently, Severstal Steel will be installing several baghouses, eliminating torch cutting on-site, reducing the opacity of emissions from scarfing operations, and reducing the smoking of torpedo cars. Severstal will also take the following actions to offset their PM2.5 emissions: retrofit local school buses, retrofit diesel equipment on-site, and plant trees around their facility. U.S. Steel has already replaced a baghouse that has decreased its PM2.5 emissions. Marathon Oil will add nitrogen oxide controls to their facilities, as well an electrostatic precipitator to catch PM before it is emitted. Marathon has also recently applied for a permit to build a new coking unit and as a result has agreed to several voluntary community benefits to help offset its PM output. The community benefits include retrofitting school buses, enhancing street sweeping on public roads near the plant, installing air monitors near the facility, installing PM controls on the trucks that will transport the processed coke, and purchasing PM10 off-sets from retired plants. The area will also benefit from the retrofitting of 40 diesel switch engines. Stationary Source Inventory Table 4 on the following pages lists major facilities in the project area, the primary industrial activity they engage in, the amount of land they occupy, and the amount of PM they reported emitted in 2004.

34

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Table 4: Stationary Source Inventory
Name BP Products North America River Rouge Cadillac Asphalt Products Carmeuse/Detroit Lime Carmeuse/River Rouge City of Detroit: Waste Water Treatment Plant Coca Cola Bottling Company 9.1 14.6 3.5 4.8 125 Produces asphalt products fro highway construction projects Produces stone, clay, lime, and glass products Serves as a delivery terminal for stone, clay, lime and glass products Processes the waste-water for the entire Metro-Detroit region, largest single-site wastewater treatment facilities in the United States Markets, distributes, and produces bottled and canned beverage products for The Coca-Cola Company Comprehensive Environmental Solutions Crown Plating Company Daimler Chrysler - McGraw 0.5 38 19 Processes industrial waste oils, oil-contaminated waste, wastewater, waste sludge, and other solid waste Plates and polishes electrical equipment "Cuts, shapes, and tempers glass since for clear and tinted windshields, side glass, backlights, and liftgates" Darling International 9 Processes animal and food waste products into useful commercial goods, including tallow, protein meals, and yellow grease Dearborn Industrial Generation Detroit Edision - River Rouge Power Plant Detroit Edison - Delray Power Plant Detroit Electro-Coatings Company LLC Detroit Public Light - Mistersky Power Station Detroit Salt 26.8 18 23.1 37.9 101.9 11 Generates 550 megawatts of power with natural gas Generates 527 megawatts of electricity with coal-burning Generates 350 megawatts of power with coalburning, Detroit’s first power plant Coats, packages, assembles, warehouses and 1 distributes electric equipment Generates 160 megawatts of electricity with coal-burning Mines rock salt from under the city of Detroit and distributes the product in bulk as road deicing salt to governments and other entities in Michigan EDW C Levy DO Plant 1 EDW C Levy DO Plant 6 26.8 10.3 Produces, quarries, and stores stone and other aggregate materials Produces, quarries, and stores stone and other aggregate materials 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 208 11 2 4 0 0 6 17 0 0 1 5143 38 1619 45 484 78 870 5 19 17 5 12 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 276 42 52 52 556 327 47 55 29 111 0 0 7 0 1 10 Land Area (acres) 29 2002 Emissions (in tons) Activity Stores and loads BP gas NOX 0 SO2 0 PM10 0 VOC 52

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

35

Equilon Enterprises Detroit

17

Lubricates and prepares equipment with oils, natural oils, synthetic oils, waxes, greases, and anti corrosives

0

0

0

36

Fabricon Products Incorporated Ferrous Environmental Recycling Corporation Ford Motor Company Rouge River Complex

13.5 18.2 600

Produces paper and film packaging Processes and recycles scrap metal Produces automobiles, the first fully verticallyintegrated facility that used a continuous, nonstop process from raw material to finished product

2 0 41

0 3 15

0 0 0

35 0 244

Fritz Products Hispanic MFG/ Gonzalez MFG Honeywell IPMC Acquisition LLC

29.9 8.7 12.2 40.8

Manufactures smelting ovens Manufactures engine products Manufactures industrial products including chemicals and electronics equipment Produces laminated papers, coated papers, newsprint and offset papers, and tissue papers

0 0 27 128

1 0 2 0

0 0 50 0

6 22 55 4

Kasle Steel Corporation Magni Industries, Inc.

20.2 3

Processes flat rolled steel for industrial customers Manufactures over thirty different epoxy-based coating products Produces 100,000 barrels per day of crude oil into gasoline (50%), diesel (28%), asphalt (17%), and other products (5%)

4 0 1323

0 0 191

0 0 874

0 22 606

Marathon-Ashland Oil Refinery 200 - Detroit Owens Corning - Trumbull Division Reily Plating/Mlok Incorporated Severstal North America 491.2 3.9 23.8

Produces low fuming asphalt for built-up roofing, shingle manufacturing, industrial applications, highway maintenance and paving

15

8

33

15

Coats, packages, assembles, warehouses and 0 distributes electric equipment Produces 2.7 million tons of crude steel and 2.9 million tons of finished steel per year, the fourth largest integrated steel producer in the United States 1807

0 267

0 352

0 51

Spartan Industrial Incorporated St. Mary’s Cement Sunoco - River Rouge United States Gypsum Company US Steel Great Lakes Works

6.5 42.1 13.5 21 323

Manufactures new automobile racks Processes and stores cement Stores and loads gasoline, kerosene, and No. 2 fuel oil Produces gypsum wallboard and related products Produces 3.5 million tons of steel per year, one of five integrated steelmaking facilities in the United States

0 0 50 24 3785

0 1 0 6 695

0 0 0 0 4746

2 0 23 1 227

Totals

2396.8

14254

1479

8744

1541

36

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Considering the air quality regulations for the operations that take place at major stationary sources in Michigan, these facilities are likely required to apply for a New Source Review permit to install equipment that exacerbates air pollution. As a result of that permitting process they are often obligated to develop and implement a fugitive dust program. These facilities’ fugitive dust programs generally include the strategic spraying of heavily used unpaved roadways with chemicals that suppress dust. Fugitive dust programs also involve cleaning vehicle tires to prevent track-out, maintaining baghouses to filter PM out of smokestack emissions, and covering storage piles. Major Mobile Sources
3,486,110 trucks cross the Ambassador Bridge each year making it the busiest United States–Canada border crossing for trucks.

Mobile sources are also major contributors to the PM levels in the project area. The area hosts the Ambassador Bridge, which is the busiest United States–Canada border crossing for trucks. According to the EPA, 3,486,110 trucks per year use this crossing.7 Traffic across the United StatesCanada border at this location is projected to increase by approximately 40 percent for vehicles and 120 percent for trucks by 2030.8 In response, the Detroit International Bridge Company (DIBC), owners of the Ambassador Bridge, plans to build a second span of the Ambassador Bridge from Windsor to Detroit. This proposal is competing with a multi-national partnership proposal that seeks to build a brand new international bridge crossing that will be located in the community of Delray, at the heart of the project area. The Michigan Department of Transportation is currently completing a new gateway for the Ambassador Bridge that will provide direct access between the Ambassador Bridge and Michigan’s freeway system. There are also several large and small trucking and transportation facilities in the area, like the Livernois-Junction Yard. These are generally serviced by the major truck routes in the area; but, there has been an increasing tendency for these trucks to use residential streets to access their destinations.9 National Regulations for Mobile Sources According to the State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), PM2.5 emissions will decrease “by over 51 percent between 2002 and the attainment year, 2010” through the implementation of three new federal requirements.”10 The first program consists of Tier 2 Emissions Standards, which “requires manufacturers to produce vehicles that emit much lower levels of pollution than earlier generations.”11 The second program includes the new Diesel Rule, which requires that sulfur in diesel

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

37

fuel be reduced by 97 percent. The EPA estimates this will reduce diesel emissions by 97 percent.12 The third program is the phasing in of low-sulfur gasoline and diesel fuel. The 2004 standard required that the “average sulfur level to be no greater that 30 parts per million (ppm).”13 A new standard, adopted in 2006, will require the standard to be 15 ppm. The 2002 sulfur levels in Southeast Michigan were measured at 430 ppm., representing a 28-fold reduction.14 Local Regulations for Mobile Sources The State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) does not identify any local-level controls for mobile sources. Mobile Source Inventory New Bridges There are currently two competing plans for new bridges in the area (see Figure 1). One is the DIBC proposal to build a new bridge span directly west of the existing Ambassador Bridge. The other proposal, the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC), is from a multi-national partnership that includes the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHA), Transport Canada, and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. This proposal is currently in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) process and is, therefore, still evaluating the environmental and social impact of several different bridge alternatives. The DIBC reports that the new span, a six-lane cable stay bridge, will replace the existing span. The existing span will close for rehabilitation once the second span is built and “after it is rehabilitated, the existing Ambassador Bridge will be maintained and available as a redundant resource for maintenance vehicles, emergencies and approved public events.”15 The DIBC completed an environmental assessment that estimates the new span will not negatively impact the air quality in Wayne County. As the lead federal agency on the project, the U.S. Coast Guard requested that the DIBC conduct an environmental assessment of the proposed “enhancement.” The Air Quality section of this assessment, performed by Weston Solutions of Detroit, MI, states that “at .0077% of the total Wayne County PM2.5 emissions, the PM2.5 emissions from the New Bridge would not be a significant contribution to the non-attainment condition of PM2.5 in Wayne County.”16 Lawrence M. Hands, of Detroit-based Environmental Engineering firm Hands and Associates, Inc. conducted an air quality impact analysis of the “enhancement” project with the current version of the MOBILE model and the EPA-approved SCREEN3 dispersion model. An analysis of the new Gateway reveals that maximum hourly particulate pollution may reach up to 70 micrograms per cubic meter of air per hour and up to 28 micrograms per cubic meter of air in a 24-hour period,17 whereas NAAQS for PM2.5 over a

38

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

24-hour period is thirty-five micrograms per cubic meter. When these figures are combined with the current PM2.5 nonattainment level of 40 micrograms per cubic meter of air, the total exceeds NAAQS standards by 49 percent. The DRIC project includes nine different alternative plans for the new crossing. The nine options are separated into three major crossings (X10A, X10B, X11), two plaza types (P-a, P-c), and six interchanges (A, B, C, E, G, I). All of the proposals have the crossings entering into a “140 to 160 acre” plaza that will be located in Delray, which is located in the northeast portion of the project area.18 The DEIS measures impacts with a comparative analysis between a no-build alternative and the several build alternatives mentioned above projected to the year 2013. According to the DEIS each alternative would have little to no impact on 2013 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) throughout the region and at the plaza area in Delray. However, the new crossing may have significant social impacts on the Delray community. According to the DEIS, the only area likely to experience an increase in VMT is the community of Delray. Areas close to Delray and home to the most sensitive populations, including Southwestern High School, Beard Early Education Center, Amelia Earhart Middle School, and Daniel Webster Elementary School, were chosen for a more precise “hot-spot” analysis to determine localized air quality impacts from the new crossing alternatives. These analyses conclude that the proposed project “will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS,”19 citing stricter vehicle emission controls and fuel standards that will reduce overall vehicle pollution.20 Truck Routes Several major truck routes and two Interstate highways transverse our project area. All of these roads carry commercial truck traffic and passenger automobiles to destinations within and beyond the project area boundaries. Trucking Facilities There are many trucking facilities in the project area. These facilities range in physical size and attract varying levels of commercial truck traffic. Consequently, trucking facilities are a major source of PM and fugitive dust. The largest trucking facility in the area is the 300-acre LivernoisJunction Yard, which is jointly controlled by CSX and Norfolk Southern. This yard attracts thousands of trucks per day to exchange goods with railcars. This facility, called the Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal (DIFT), plans to expand its operations and has sparked a major debate over the potential implications on the surrounding community.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

39

The Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal Study is examining various growth and expansion scenarios. The study has been under way for the last decade or so and it is currently in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) stage. Alternative 4 (modified) has emerged as the most viable alternative, which will focus most of the terminal activity into the expanded Livernois Junction yard, located in Southwest Detroit. If approved the DIFT would be expanded to 565 acres and would attract up to 4,600 commercial trucks per day.21 A community benefits agreement is currently undergoing negotiations and will likely include certain air quality control measures. Fugitive Dust Sources Unregulated Facilities Identified as Major Fugitive Dust Sources MDEQ has identified and sent letters to 44 facilities in the project area regarding fugitive dust issues. The facilities, “usually paved lots, unpaved lots, roadways and storage piles” that receive the letter are informed that they are in violation of Michigan Administrative Rules 371, 372, and 901, as well as Section 5524 of Part 55 of Public Act 451.22 The letters request property owners to proactively treat fugitive dust emissions with “approved dust suppressants...or other appropriate measures...such as wet sweeping, vacuum cleaning, watering, paving, use if tarps or wind screens, use of wheel washers, and sweeping up track-out dust.”23 MDEQ also requests that property owners “log the fugitive dust control measures...noting the date and the type of dust control measure implemented.”24 Source Selection In order to catalogue sites for fugitive dust mitigation, we used a combination of site visits, aerial photography, and a list of potential fugitive dust sources from MDEQ. A total of 50 sites were selected and categorized in the following manner (see Figure 8). 1. Unpaved Lots at Active Businesses 2. Uncovered Storage Piles 3. Barren Unpaved Land 4. Facilities with Trucking Activities (Track-Out) 5. Major Truck Routes

40

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Figure 8: Fugitive Dust Sources

Additional Considerations Most major routes are controlled by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and therefore the Capital Preventative Maintenance Program (CMP) controls maintenance (repaving, sweeping, restructuring). An examination of the SEMCOG 2008 – 2011 Transportation Plan shows that three sections of Fort Street (M-85) are scheduled for restructuring: • Segment 1 - Fort Street from Schaefer to Oakwood • Segment 2 - Fort Street from Miller to Springwells • Segment 3 - Fort Street from Springwells to Clark In 2005 MDOT adopted a Context Sensitive Solutions (or Context Sensitive Design) Policy for major road projects. Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) is a project conception and design process that seeks to get communitymembers involved at the beginning of, and throughout, major transportation projects so they can truly influence the outcome. It ensures that the environmental, cultural and historical resources of a community remain intact despite a major transportation project. The policy states, “The Department [MDOT] will incorporate an appropriate level of CSS in its Transportation Program consistent with CSS principles which include:”25

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

41

• Early and Continuous Public Involvement • Effective Decision Making • Reflecting Community Values • Achieving Environmental Sensitivity and Stewardship • Ensuring Safe and Feasible Integrated Solutions • Protecting Scenic Resources and Achieving Aesthetically Pleasing Solutions This policy provides a community with an opportunity to get involved in developing the design standards of local roads Figure 9 illustrates the busiest roads in the project area.
Figure 9: Average Daily Vehicle Traffic

42

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5). Retrieved February 13, 2008, from http://www.michigan. gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3310---,00.html.
2 3

1

Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, personal communication, 2007.

The National Conference of State Legislatures. (2005). EPA finalizes Clean Air Interstate Rule. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from http://www.ncsl.org/programs/environ/air/EPAairrule.htm.
4 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http:// www.epa.gov/cair/basic.html. 5 6 7

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Ibid.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Retrieved January 11, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/midwestcleandiesel/sectors/border/index.html.
8 9

Ibid. Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, Personal Communication, March 2008. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008), 30.

10 11 12 13 14 15

Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project Website. Retrieved January 12, 2008 from http:// www.ambassadorbridge.com/ambassador-project.html. Draft Environmental Assessment for Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project. (2007). Appendix K, 5. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from http://www.ambassadorbridge.com/drafts/ Appendix_K_Air_Quality.pdf. Gateway Community Development Cooperative. (2007). Comments to the US Coast Guard Regarding the Ambassador Bridge Expansion Project. August 30, 2007, 8.

16

17

18

Detroit River International Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Section 2 “Alternatives”, 52. Retrieved March 31, 2008 from http://www.partnershipborderstudy.com/reports_ us.asp. Detroit River International Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The Environment: What’s There Now and What are the Impacts, Section 3, 92.

19

20

Detroit River International Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The Environment: What’s There Now and What are the Impacts, Section 3, 94. Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal (DIFT), Section 1, 17. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Fugitive Dust Control Letter Sample, obtained March 8, 2008. Ibid. Ibid.

21

22

23 24

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

43

25

Michigan Department of Transportation. (2005). Context Sensitive Solutions Policy, adopted May 26, 2005, Retrieved February 26, 2008 from http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,7-151-9 621_41446---,00.html.

44

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

6

Strategies for Mitigating Fugitive Dust

Strategies aimed at mitigating fugitive dust generally fall into one of two broad categories: those that are mechanical or technical in nature and those that involve bioengineering, such as planting vegetation. Mechanical solutions are often actions carried out in response to elevated levels of coarse particulates and fugitive dust, whereas strategies involving vegetation are intended as more permanent solutions to manage fugitive dust over time. Typical mechanical solutions may involve (1) techniques to suppress dust that may become airborne and prevent it from escaping a site (for example, covering inactive storage piles); (2) actions to prevent dust-producing material from leaving a site (on truck wheels, for example); or (3) controlling traffic and production to reduce dust generation. On the other hand, bioengineering strategies are long-term solutions that involve planting trees, shrubs, and grasses on sites to filter airborne dust particles out of the air, to screen or block dust from escaping a site, or to help prevent further dust generation that may result from unpaved lots or industrial activities. Across the country air quality programs attempt to control particulate matter, and in some cases, fugitive dust through regulations. Combining state and local regulations with mechanical solutions can lead to effective fugitive dust reduction programs; however, these efforts require monitoring and are often short-term solutions for particular sources of fugitive dust. More comprehensive approaches embrace these strategies and also include elements of bioengineering, like strategically planted vegetation, to further remediate fugitive dust pollution. By capturing and filtering pollutants vegetation can significantly improve local air quality. Four basic processes that reduce or prevent fugitive dust generation are: 1. Minimize creation of dust particles 2. Block wind or reduce wind speed at ground level 3. Capture and remove dust particles from sources 4. Wet or bind particles1
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 45

Mechanical and standard practices are built upon all of these processes, whereas vegetative strategies rely on minimizing, blocking, and capturing dust. In Michigan, MDEQ uses the air quality permitting process to manage fugitive dust for certain types of activities and facilities. In addition, MDEQ recommends certain “best management practices” to diminish fugitive dust generated by any potential source. (see section 4 for more information on Michigan’s fugitive dust regulations). Supplementing local fugitive dust regulations with bioengineering strategies recommended in this report will enhance the fugitive dust reduction capabilities of any given site, increasing the overall effectiveness of the area-wide approach. The following provides an overview of typical mechanical and technical solutions to fugitive dust generation and control and the use of bioengineering strategies, specifically planting vegetation, to absorb, filter, and block fugitive dust.
Case Study: Albuquerque, NM According to Billy Gallegos, supervisor of the fugitive dust control program, the city was within 80 percent of the federal PM10 standard and “much of that, about 90 percent, came from fugitive dust.”2 As a result, Albuquerque created a Fugitive Dust Control program based on state regulations requiring landowners to obtain permits for carrying out dust-creating activities. As part of the permitting process, owners are required to pay fees to the city based on the disturbance created, and the money is then used to further manage fugitive dust.3 Permits are $55 per acre for a one-year permit for land producing a moderate amount of dust, $99 per acre “with no dust controls,... and if excellent controls can be demonstrated on the property, the cost [is] $11 per acre each year.”4 The city is responsible for enforcing the permits. Lessons learned: Local-level regulation allows municipalities flexibility in addressing area-specific fugitive dust

Mechanical Solutions and Standard Practices While it may be difficult to halt generation of fugitive dust and particulate matter altogether, certain practices can greatly reduce the amount of fugitive dust generated and minimize its negative health impacts. Among the most common solutions are simple actions such as spraying unpaved lots, roads, and piles, washing truck wheels, sweeping streets, and covering truck beds and storage piles. Street sweepers play a prominent role in many fugitive dust management programs as an effective means of cleaning up dust once

46

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

it has been generated. As illustrated in the San Joaquin Valley Dust Control Program case study, vacuum sweepers are considerably more effective than broom sweepers. Street sweeper models on the market range in price and efficacy and some are more appropriate for fugitive dust mitigation than others.
Recent estimates reported by Metro in Portland, OR show that conventional broom and wet-vacuum sweepers can reduce nonpoint pollution by up to 30 percent, whereas new vacuum-assisted dry sweepers can potentially achieve 50 to 88 percent overall reduction in the annual sediment loading for a residential street, depending on frequency of use.5

Many dust mitigation techniques are quite versatile and can be easily adapted to reduce pollution from a variety of sources. A common element in fugitive dust mitigation techniques, which can be applied to nearly all dust sources, is routine maintenance of facilities and sites. Routine maintenance can minimize dust by ensuring that sites and equipment are clean and properly functioning. Other effective mechanical solutions focus on actions to temporarily reduce or prevent dust generation by altering on-site processes and activities, blocking wind, cleaning vehicles to minimize transport of dirt and dust, and preventing dust particles from becoming airborne by covering or wetting them.

Case Study: San Joaquin Valley, CA The San Joaquin Valley Dust Control Program is an element of the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District’s overall air pollution plan. It utilizes an Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT) model to determine when it is necessary for owners or operators to take action to stabilize dust emissions. This model measures average traffic created by specific land uses, and requires abatement measures depending on this value. The San Joaquin Valley Program includes rules for using street sweepers, specifies requirements for on-site dust control plans, and provides training programs for owners and operators. Specifically, it prohibits using blower devices or rotary brushes because they do not remove dust, but rather simply move it around--an important point given that many companies across the country utilize street sweepers as part of fugitive dust management strategies. It is clear that not all models have the same dust-reducing capacity and efforts to reduce fugitive dust should carefully select appropriate models. In this program, requirements regarding types and configurations of street sweepers and blowers explicitly apply to government agencies and contractors that provide such services, as well as to companies that might carry out street sweeping on their own. In addition to mechanical solutions, the San Joaquin Valley also recommends planting vacant, unpaved lots with vegetation to reduce fugitive dust. Lessons learned: Dust control programs may prove more effective by incorporating training programs for owners and operators of dust-producing facilities. Regular review of dust-reducing mechanisms can help determine which methods are most effective.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

47

Table 5 provides an overview of common mechanical solutions in fugitive dust management strategies compiled from local governments around the country.
Table 5: Mechanical Solution for Reducing Fugitive Dust
Dust Source Unpaved Roadways and Unpaved Lots Method Pave or cover with gravel Spray with: Water Chemical Synthetic stabilizers Control traffic Functions and Benefits Stabilize road or lot surface. Low maintenance Bind particles Best for short distances and temporary remediation Choices include products such as oil, calcium chloride or lingosulfate Lower speed limits to minimize amount of dust kicked up; restrict access to local traffic only to reduce dust generation Increase stability of new roads or roads under construction Dislodge PM from wheels Minimize road disturbance, dust generation, and reduce transport of dust from site to site Knock mud and bulk material off vehicle tires, preventing track-out, reducing future dust generation Dislodge PM from wheels, prevent track-out Remove dust and debris Knock mud and material off vehicle tires, preventing track-out and reducing future dust generation Bind material particles or create crust to prevent erosion. Especially useful during windy conditions. Minimize dust generation, reduce transport of dust across sites and through neighborhoods Surround or cover piles, and block from wind to prevent emission of fugitive dust Prevent dust from escaping truck bed Bind material particles or create crust to prevent erosion Reduce potential for dust to kick up

Install geotextile fabrics Provide crushed stone or gravel at entrance/exit Encourage strict adherence to posted truck-routes; re-route traffic to paved roads when possible Install paved or gravel entry/exit aprons and steel grates Wash trucks and wheels at entrance/exit to site Paved Roadways Sweep or vacuum streets Install paved or gravel entry/exit aprons Spray with water, or other suitable material Limit traffic – create and enforce designated truck routes, limit allowable speeds Storage Piles: Inactive Cover (tarp, hay or straw), install barriers (wind fencing), or enclose piles Cover the entire surface area of the load by properly securing tarps or covers Spray with water, chemical or synthetic solution Active Minimize height or distance from which material is dropped into pile Spray with water, chemical or synthetic solution

Bind material particles or create crust to prevent erosion. Especially useful during windy conditions.

48

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Hauling Trucks

Maintain a minimum of six inches of freeboard from the rim of the truck bed* Spray truck beds/load (wet suppression) Pave roadways and parking areas

Prevent leakage from truck bed, sideboards, tailgate, or bottom dump gate Increase moisture content of materials, making them less likely to fly away Use recycled asphalt, asphalt, concrete, or petroleum products Minimize amount of dust blowing off site Prevent dust from blowing off site Bind material particles or create crust to prevent erosion Bind material particles or create crust to prevent erosion. Especially useful during windy conditions. Bind material particles Reduce opportunities for dust creation, decrease chances for dust to escape Reduce opportunities for dust creation Reduce opportunities for dust creation Use fabric, fences, etc. to reduce amount of dust escaping from site. Set perpendicular to wind for maximum benefit. Sweep streets, wash wheels prior to exiting a site reducing amount of sediment in roads Minimize dust blowing off site Minimize dust generation Minimize amount of dust allowed to blow across site; minimize length of time dust is allowed to sit in open air Stabilize soil by binding particles Use gravel, mulch, hay or other material

Industrial Sites

Install wind breaks Enclose site Apply dust suppressant (increase before and during high wind conditions) Apply wetting agents or surfactants to material Add dust suppressants to stored material

Bulk Material Handling

Cease or diminish bulk material handling, processing, loading or unloading during high wind conditions Slow process speeds Reduce drop heights Install temporary wind barriers

Construction Activities

Clean up and control track-out; control runoff Install wind breaks Limit vehicle speed to 10 miles per hour on facility grounds Begin construction upwind from prevailing wind direction; progress in down-wind direction, cleaning up along the way Apply dust suppressants to ground Cover surfaces to prevent material from becoming airborne

*”Freeboard” is the vertical distance from the highest portion of the load abutting the bed and the lowest part of the top rim of the truck bed. (Sources: Washington State Department of Ecology, “Urban Fugitive Dust Policy” (1996) Appendix B; City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, NM, “Fugitive Dust Control Regulation” Section 20.11.20.23; San Joaquin Valley (CA) Dust Control Program; Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division, “Air Quality in Idaho: Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Information.”)

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

49

Case Study: Benton County, WA In 1994 an air quality monitor in Kennewick, Washington recorded PM10 levels exceeding National Ambient Air Quality Standards over a period of several years. Authorities determined that these high levels were primarily the result of wind-blown dust from surrounding area and “urban sources.” As a means of reducing PM10 levels, the county developed an Urban Fugitive Dust Policy, which provides guidelines to help landowners and operators fulfill state regulations. The Policy requires that operators “take reasonable precautions to prevent fugitive dust from becoming airborne and maintain and operate the source to minimize emissions.”6 Although the recommended control measures rely heavily on mechanical solutions, they specifically call for use of vegetation as a long-term solution for stabilizing open storage piles and vacant lots. Lessons learned: Long-term effective dust-reduction relies on the use of both mechanical and vegetative solutions.
Simple traffic calming measures can be effective in lowering the amount of fugitive dust generated. Studies show that “[l]owering the speed of a vehicle from 45 miles per hour to 35 miles per hour can reduce emissions by up to 22 percent.”7

Bioengineering and Vegetation While mechanical solutions are effective means for preventing and lowering the amount of fugitive dust generated, a comprehensive dust management program should also incorporate bioengineering strategies. Typically used in the medical field, the term bioengineering refers to the application of engineering principles and design to science and medicine, or in many cases to the environment and ecology. In this case bioengineering is used to describe a combination of techniques, including planting vegetation, soil remediation, and earth moving (erosion control) aimed at improving environmental conditions. This project relies on bioengineering techniques as the core of its fugitive dust mitigation strategies. Specifically, it focuses on the use of vegetation to absorb and filter dust from the air. Recognizing the air quality benefits that vegetation provides, air pollution programs are beginning to include bioengineering techniques, using vegetation to mitigate fugitive dust. In order to fully alleviate the negative impacts of fugitive dust, a management program should comprise a variety of mitigation techniques, each selected to maximize effectiveness, including bioengineering.

50

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Support for Bioengineering Strategies • The Washington State Department of Ecology recommends planting low-traffic areas with vegetation to absorb the dust generated by vehicles and clearing vegetation only from portions of a site that will be actively used right away.8 • The Center for Urban Forest Research (Davis, CA) and the United States Forest Service recommend planting trees as part of air pollution strategies. Furthermore, these organizations recommend integrating bioengineering mitigation techniques into formalized programs – writing tree planting into State Implementation Plans – by working with the EPA and local air quality management organizations.9 • Metro (Portland, OR) recommends planting street trees as a way to manage pollutants in stormwater runoff as well as to improve air quality.

The Role of Vegetation in Reducing Air Pollution Mechanisms of Pollution Removal Pollution is removed from the air by wet deposition, chemical reactions, and dry deposition. Specifically, particulate matter is removed from the air by wet and dry deposition (see Figure 10). Wet deposition occurs when precipitation removes particles from the air and is not influenced by land cover. Conversely, dry deposition is influenced by land cover and occurs when PM: 1. Settles from the air due to gravity 2. Is intercepted by a physical barrier to wind and falls to the ground 3. Is absorbed within the vegetation through leaf stomata 4. Is retained on the plant leaf and bark surfaces
Figure 10: Mechanisms for Pollution Removal

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

51

Changing land cover characteristics, such as adding vegetation, can increase the opportunity for dry deposition to occur and consequently to remove pollutants. Vegetation plays an important role in reducing air pollution because of its ability to absorb and retain particulates and form physical wind barriers. Studies demonstrate the long-term air pollution mitigation benefits of re-vegetation using shrubs and trees.10 Intercepting particulates is one of the important ways through which trees and shrubs clean the air. Canopies act as filters and bulk collectors, collecting both particulate matter and gaseous vapors. Through foliar exchanges, canopies uptake dry-deposited matter, absorbing and filtering air pollution through stomatal conductance.11&12 Odorous gases, chemicals and dust particles become fixed to plant surfaces and enter into the plant tissue by gaseous diffusion through open stomata and by direct absorption of pollutants. Tree canopies are also important because of their ability to alter the urban microclimate. Changes in microclimate can affect air pollution concentrations. Tree canopies influence the concentration of ozone, carbon dioxide, water vapor, air temperature, light intensity, and wind speed.13 Additionally, canopies impact radiation absorption and heat storage, wind speed, relative humidity, turbulence, surface albedo, surface roughness and consequently, the evolution of the mixing-layer height through transpiration.14 Trees block and redirect wind--affecting mixing layer height and width--and reduce wind speeds, both important factors in ambient pollution concentration.15 Changes in microclimate also affect how trees absorb pollutants.16 Fluctuations in local temperature influence stomatal conductance and uptake of air pollutants. Formation of air pollutants is temperature dependant; therefore, increased tree coverage can significantly reduce negative impacts by lowering air temperature. Consequently, planting trees and other vegetation at densities sufficient to alter microclimates is an effective way of reducing ambient air pollution. Quantification of PM10 Removal by Vegetation A study from 2005 indicates that trees take up more PM10 than smaller vegetation “as a result of their large leaf areas and the turbulent air movement created by their structure.”17 In temperate zone cities such as Detroit, an average of 34 percent of the metropolitan area has tree cover.18 Standardized pollution removal rates of vegetation differ among locations according to the amount of air pollution and precipitation, the length of in-leaf season, and the strength of wind. Research conducted in New York City, Chicago, and Detroit indicates that trees can remove hundreds and, in some cases, thousands of metric tons of air pollution annually.19 Large healthy trees greater than 30.15
52 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Tree canopies influence the concentration of ozone, carbon dioxide, water vapor, air temperature, light intensity, and wind speed.

inches in diameter remove approximately 70 times more air pollution annually (3.1 lbs/yr) than smaller healthy trees less than 3.15 inches in diameter (0.04 lbs/yr).20 As a result, air quality generally improves with increased tree cover.21 A 1994 study in metropolitan Chicago estimated that “by planting trees on 25% of available grass and soil space in Chicago (an increase in overall tree cover from 19.4% to 23.5%), there is a 21% increase of PM10 removed from the Chicago atmosphere.”22 Existing urban forests throughout the Chicago region remove approximately 212 tons of PM10 each year, resulting in a total PM10 removal of 4.6 pounds per acre per year.23&24
Studies show that tree cover in Detroit improved air quality and reduced costs associated with air pollution. Detroit has 31 percent tree cover, removing 2.1 million pounds of air pollution annually, worth a savings of $5.1 million.

The 2006 Urban Ecosystem Analysis of SE Michigan and the City of Detroit found that tree cover in Detroit improved air quality and reduced costs associated with air pollution. Detroit has 31 percent tree cover, removing 2.1 million pounds of air pollution annually, worth a savings of $5.1 million. Based on satellite imagery, planning Cluster 5, representing about 50 percent of the study area, has roughly 18 percent tree cover. The existing canopy removes 134,000 pounds of air pollution annually, worth a savings of $318,000.25 However, our analysis of the research area indicates that these tree cover estimates may be high. Additional vegetation would further reduce particulate pollution. Species Specific Generally, some plant species are more tolerant of high levels of air pollution than others, resulting in varying air pollution adsorption rates between species. Both conifers and deciduous trees absorb odorous gases and particles into their foliage during the growing season, but some species absorb more than others due to differences in stomatal activity and resistances and leaf surface area. In general, pollution uptake is higher in the growing season than in the dormant season. However, the growing season for conifers is spring and fall, whereas it is spring and summer for deciduous trees. Thus different tree species are more effective removing pollution at different times of year. Interception and retention of particulates is highly variable between plant species. Plants with “smaller leaves and/or leaves with a rough surface are more efficient in collecting particles than larger and/or smoother leaves.”26 Conifers are better interceptors of air pollutants than deciduous trees because they retain their needles year-round and the complex shape of their needles enables them to intercept more precipitation.27 Conifers are also more successful in trapping and suspending particulate matter because of their evergreen qualities of small, year-long leaves and relatively high foliage density. Increased stickiness of pine trees facilitates uptake of coarser particulates, whereas roughness is a more important factor for collection of finer particulates.28 Studies examine the effects of various forms of PM on tree

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

53

species in areas similar to Southeast Michigan, but more research is needed as species specific information is fragmentary at best.29 Location Specific The location and concentration of vegetation determines the effectiveness of its remedial potential. Research on woodland air pollution control reveals that the “most effective use of trees as particulate filters is achieved when planting occurs as close as possible to the source, forming a buffer around it.”30 More recent research discusses the importance of what is termed the “edge effect.”31 Where many trees are planted in a small area, edge trees catch more particulates than interior trees because of increased surface area of the planting. Thus, because of the edge effect, individual trees “will have more benefit than a forest.”32 Trees and shrubs can also mitigate air pollution by altering airflows and acting as windbreaks. In Southeast Michigan, winds are generally light and blow from the southwest to the northeast. When installed properly, windbreaks (or shelterbelts) can remove between 35 percent and 55 percent of dust carried in moving air.33 The effectiveness of trees in windbreaks depends on the porosity of the barrier created by the canopy. Studies show that shelterbelt efficiency peaks at medium porosities, which is best achieved by using two or three rows of trees.34 Screens composed of combinations of different plants in multiple rows are more effective than those composed of either single rows or a single species. Plants used in screens should exhibit tight, compact growth patterns, giving them a dense set of leaves with which they can absorb and filter dust.35 Since dust cannot be confined to a single site, to achieve maximum benefit, windscreens should be connected and planted across multiple lots or pieces of property whenever possible. Optimal windward protection (upwind of the screen) occurs within six times the height of a row of trees (for protection against cooling breezes, locate within 5 times tree height). Leeward protection (downwind of the screen) occurs within four to twenty-five times the height of a row of trees, depending on opacity (see Figure 11). Very dense trees (roughly 60 percent or higher porosity) offer protection within zero to four times tree height. Deciduous
Figure 11: Optimal Windbreak Design
According to the United States Forest Service, findings from a study show that 6 million trees in Sacramento, CA were responsible for removing 748 tons of PM10 annually.”36

54

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

trees in the winter offer protection from zero to fifteen times tree height, and moderately dense deciduous trees (roughly 40-60 percent porosity) protect against leeward winds up to a distance of twenty-five times tree height. Bioengineering techniques to reduce fugitive dust: • Reseed a site using native grasses to stabilize soil, filter particulates, and prevent erosion • Plant trees and other vegetation to absorb and filter particulates • Construct multi-row wind barriers using plants of varied height • Reduce potential for track-out by controlling runoff onto roadways using filter strips, for example • Cover inactive or long-term storage piles with vegetative mulch to prevent dust from escaping Scientific studies show that using vegetation is a practical and cost-effective land use practice that can aid in suppressing fugitive dust and particulate matter. Tree canopies act as filters and bulk collectors, collecting both the particulate matter and the gaseous vapors. The type of vegetation, leaf type, length of in-leaf season, stickiness, and canopy are all important factors in designing vegetated areas for pollution remediation. In addition to absorbing and filtering particulate matter, vegetation can be used to construct windscreens to block fugitive dust, minimizing its impact on the surrounding environment. Strategic use and thoughtful design of vegetation is an important part of comprehensive and innovative solutions to air pollution problems. For maximum effectiveness, supplement mechanical solutions with bioengineering strategies Mechanical: 1. Suppress dust by paving, covering, and applying dust suppressant 2. Prevent dust generation by controlling track-out Bioengineering and Vegetation: 1. Trees are more effective dust collectors than other smaller vegetation 2. Plant vegetation as close to fugitive dust sources as possible, surrounding them when possible 3. To maximize capture of dust, arrange trees to create edges, rather than large forested clusters 4. To maximize wind protection, plant multiple rows of species characterized by moderate porosity 5. Aim for a mix of coniferous and deciduous vegetation

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

55

Based on Washington State Department of Ecology (2003). Techniques for dust prevention and suppression.
2 Vorenberg, S. Getting a fix on state’s dust problem starts at the border and fans up. The Albuquerque Tiribune. (2006, January 22). 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1

Armijo, B. Controlling Dust a Must. The Albuquerque Journal. (2004, February 6). Ibid. Metro. (2002). Green Streets: Innovative Solutions for Stormwater and Stream Crossings, 49. Metro. (2002), 3. Washington Administrative Code Regulation 173-400-040 (8)(a), 2. Washington State Department of Ecology. (2003).

United States Forest Service and The Center for Urban Forest Research. (2006), Trees – the Air Pollution Solution. Davis, CA: The Center for Urban Forest Research, 3.
10

Grantz, D. A. and Vaughan, D. L. (2003). Factors in Plant Survival for Revegetation in the Antelope Valley for Particulate Matter Control. Government Reports Announcements and Index, 8.

Rowland, A. J., Drew. M. C., and Wellburn, A. R. (1987). Foliar Entry and Incorporation of Atmospheric Nitrogen Dioxide Into Barley Plants of Different Nitrogen Status. New Phytologist, 107(2), 357-371.
12

11

Lovett, G. and Lindberg, S.E. (1984). Dry Deposition and Canopy Exchange in a Mixed Oak Forest as Determined by Analysis of Throughfall. The Journal of Applied Ecology, 21(3), 137-148. Grantz, D. A., Vaughn D. L., Metheny, P. A., Malkus P., (1995). Effect of Canopy Structure and Open-Top Chamber Techniques on Micrometeorological Parameters and the Gradients and Transport of Water Vapor, Carbon Dioxide and Ozone in the Canopies of Plum Trees (‘Prunus salicina’) in the San Joaquin Valley. Technical Report. Riverside, CA: California University.

13

14

Nowak, D.J., McHale P.J., Ibarra, M., Crane, D., Stevens, J., and Luley, C. (1998). Modeling the effects of urban vegetation on air pollution, In S. Gryning and N. Chaumerliac (Eds.), Air Pollution Modeling and Its Application XII, (399-407). New York: Plenum Press. Ibid.

15 16

Stalfelt, M. G. (1962.) The Effect of Temperature on Opening of the Stomatal Cells. Physiologia Plantarum, 15(4), 772-779. Freer-Smith, P.H., Beckett, K.P., and Taylor, G. (2005). Deposition velocities to Sorbus aria, Acer campestre, Populus deltoides X trichocarpa ‘Beaupre’, Pinus nigra and X Cupressocyparis leylandii for coarse, fine and ultra-fine particles in the urban environment. Environmental Pollution, 133, 158. Nowak, D. J., Crane, D. E., and Stevens, J. C. (2006). Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 4, 115-123. Ibid.

17

18

19 20

Nowak, D.J. (1994). Air pollution removal by Chicago’s urban forest. In McPherson, E.G, Nowak, D.J. and Rowntree, R.A. (Eds), Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NE-186 (63-81). Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and Northeastern Forest Experiment Station.

21 Nowak, D. J. (1994). The effect of Urban Trees on Air Quality. Syracuse, NY: USDA Forest Service.

56

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

22

McPherson, E. G, Nowak, D .J. and Rowntree, R. A. (2007). Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NE-186, 63-81. In A.G. McDonald, W. J. Bealey, D. Fowler, et al. Quantifying the effect of urban tree planting on concentrations and depositions of PM10 in two UK conurbations. Atmospheric Environment, 41, 8462. Ibid. Ibid.

23 24 25

American Forests. (2006) Urban Ecosystem Analysis: SE Michigan and City of Detroit. Washington, DC: American Forests, 8. Nowak, D.J. (1994), 64. Leuty, 2004.

26 27 28

Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H., and Taylor, G. (1998). Urban woodlands: their role in reducing the effects of particulate pollution. Environmental Pollution, 99, 354. Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H., and Taylor, G. (1998), 352.

29 30

Madders and Lawrence. (1981) in Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H., and Taylor, G. (1998). Urban woodlands: their role in reducing the effects of particulate pollution. Environmental Pollution, 99, 357. McDonald, A.G., Bealey, W.J., Fowler, D. et al. (2007). Quantifying the effect of urban tree planting on concentrations and depositions of PM10 in two UK conurbations. Atmospheric Environment, 41, 8465. Ibid.

31

32 33

Missouri Natural Resources Conservation Services. (2004). Windbreak/Shelterbelt-Odor Control. United States Department of Agriculture. Ibid. Russ, 343. United States Forest Service and The Center for Urban Forest Research, 2006, 2.

34 35 36

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

57

58

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

7

Implementation of Mitigation Strategies

The effectiveness of vegetative mitigation strategies in the project area depends on the location and size of sites, local weather conditions, and specific site characteristics. In designing a site for planting vegetation in Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn (whether re-vegetating or planting for the first time), consideration ought to be given to soil conditions and necessary preparation, selecting the appropriate planting materials, and required maintenance.1 Not all plants grow well under the same conditions and therefore, it is important to analyze a site to determine which plants it can support and where to place them. Critical factors include the dimensions of the site, soil type and condition, precipitation levels, local temperature, sun exposure, and topography. These factors affect water drainage and erosion on a site. The proximity of a site to major roadways should also be considered. Trees and shrubs may obscure drivers’ views from the road and should thus be planted according to specifications in municipal codes. Certain trees are also more sensitive to salt than others and should be avoided along major roadways. Most importantly, plants have certain requirements for proper growth. When selecting sites for implementing bioengineering strategies, it is important to ensure that plant requirements match site characteristics as closely as possible. This section provides an overview of critical site characteristics for evaluating the possibility of implementing bioengineering strategies as well as the need to select plants adapted to local conditions and guidelines for site selection (see Table 6).
Table 6: Elements of Site Assessment Site Characteristics Dimensions Context Topography Road Proximity Existing Vegetation Soil Characteristics Texture Moisture pH Level Climate Precipitation Sun Exposure Wind Direction

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

59

Site Characteristics The first and perhaps most important step in planning and design is to conduct a thorough assessment of the site, taking stock of existing conditions. This analysis will give designers a better understanding of the context within which to plan the site. Dimensions The size of a site affects the configuration of a planting scheme. Using site area measurements and the growth habits of each plant, it is possible to calculate an appropriate number of plants for that site and to determine how they will fit inside the boundaries of the site. Context The land uses surrounding a site may impact plants’ ability to survive and will affect the strategy behind plant selection. For example, depending on the neighboring uses, a site designer might consider using plants to obscure or preserve a view, as a sound barrier, or as a windscreen. It may also be useful to consider the potential future uses of a site and the presence of utilities and infrastructure such as underground sewer and gas pipes, overhead utility lines, and sidewalks. Road Proximity Vehicles churn up pollutants and salt from roads, depositing them in lawn extensions and other areas close to roads, making it more difficult for certain plant species to survive. Certain plants have a higher tolerance for salt and are thus more appropriate for roadside sites. Topography In most cases there is little change in elevation within a given site; however, some sites do contain significant slopes and it is important to be aware of such slopes when planning for vegetation. Slopes affect drainage by directing water along certain courses, causing it to pool in some areas. Steep slopes may need to be planted with appropriate vegetation (ground cover) in order to hold soil in place and prevent erosion. Existing Vegetation The presence of existing vegetation influences the potential uses and planting schemes of a site. Unwanted vegetation can affect the amount of preparation a site requires before planting can begin. Specifically, invasive species spread rapidly, choke out more desirable, less aggressive plants, and interfere with natural ecological development. Therefore a thorough site analysis should include an inventory of existing vegetation, paying careful attention to invasive species that will need to be removed.

60

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Implications 1. The planting schemes provided in this report address sites of various size and are designed to provide a range of planting options that may be adapted to nearly any size site. Large sites accommodate higher quantities of vegetation, particularly trees, making them more effective for pollution removal. However, small sites may be located in locations that are key to protecting area residents from fugitive dust, nestled between residential and industrial areas for example, and should therefore not be overlooked. 2. The presence of infrastructure on previously used or occupied sites may constrain the location of plants with deep roots. In an area such as Southwest Detroit or Southeastern Dearborn, the high proportion of industrial or similar activities may necessitate the use of plants as screens and buffers. 3. In areas where the primary mode of transportation is the automobile, most sites are within a short distance of roads. The project area has many high-traffic roads and several major truck routes. Plans to implement bioengineering strategies must account for the proximity of sites to major roads, as only hardier plants are likely to survive when exposed to yearly barrages of road salt, high concentration of automobile exhaust, and soil compaction from the weight of vehicles. 4. Most of Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn is fairly flat. Consequently, sites throughout the project area are unlikely to contain steep slopes that warrant protection. Nonetheless, it is still important to assess the topography of each site to determine where water might flow or which slopes require protection and to select plants accordingly. 5. In order to successfully implement bioengineering strategies and foster growth of beneficial plants, most sites will have to be cleared of at least some existing vegetation. When clearing vegetation, all plants must be thoroughly removed, especially invasive species, as any remnants will spread rapidly and aggressively. Widespread invasive species include purple loostrife, white sweet clover, and smooth brome. Refer to Appendix C for a thorough list of invasive species commonly found in Michigan. Soil Characteristics Another important step in analyzing a site for planting is to determine the texture, moisture, pH level, and overall quality of the soil. Knowing the condition of the soil that lies within a site allows landscape architects to determine which plants will grow best.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

61

Texture Soils have different textures based on their content. Coarse soils contain a significant amount of sand, medium-textured soils are mostly silt, and fine soils consist mostly of clay. Depending on their composition, some soils drain better than others and are therefore suitable for specific kinds of plants. Soil texture determines how well water moves through a site and therefore directly affects the amount of nutrients plants receive. Moisture Soil moisture refers to the amount of water regularly present (i.e. on a day-today basis) in the soil surrounding the roots. Moisture varies greatly depending on the soil type, texture, amount of organic matter present, exposure to sun, and temperature. Soils are generally described as being xeric (dry), mesic (semi-dry), and hydric (moist or wet), depending on the amount of sand, loam, or clay present. Depending on their responses to these characteristics, some plants are better suited to a site than others. pH Level pH refers to the presence of acids and bases in the soil solution, which carries nutrients essential for plant growth. Because certain nutrients are more readily available at particular pH levels than at others, pH levels influence the kinds of plants that are able to grow in soil. pH is measured on a scale with values from extremely acid (below 4.5) to very alkaline (above 9.0). The optimal range for most plants is in the slightly acid to neutral categories, or between 6 and 7.2 Aeration/Compaction Plants absorb oxygen necessary for growth through their roots. Both moisture content and compaction of soil affect amount of air present in soil, in turn affecting plant survival. Although it is easier to prevent compaction than to remediate it, when working on sites that are currently or have been actively used, it is not always possible to avoid compaction. A simple way to test for soil compaction is to use a “shovel test” at various points throughout a site. Where possible, place plants in well-aerated soils, such as those that have not been exposed to heavy traffic or that contain high concentrations of clay. Implications 1. Soil texture varies from site to site; however, because texture is so important in facilitating plants’ receipt of water and nutrients, it is critical to know the type of soil present on a site. 2. Soil moisture is critical to the health of plants. Moisture in soil acts as a transport system for feeding plants, which take up whatever nutrients have dissolved in water. Therefore, in an area with a history of industrial activity, soil moisture is especially key in designing planting strategies. 3. Plants have different preferences for soil acidity and alkalinity; if
62 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

a soil solution is too acidic, plants cannot utilize the nutrients they need and are more likely to take up toxic metals present in the soil, causing them to die of toxicity. Assessing soil pH is especially in the project area because the various industrial activities have contributed a range of elements to area soils, altering their pH, which may be different at each site. 4. The sites most vulnerable to compaction are those on which activities require the use of heavy machinery or regular vehicle travel. Given the level of heavy industry and high volumes of traffic throughout the project area, the soil on most sites is likely to be quite compacted. As such, sites selected for implementation of bioengineering strategies will require some level of soil remediation before planting may begin. Climate Equally important in assessing the potential for growing vegetation is the general climate or meteorological conditions in an area. Temperature, precipitation, and sun exposure are all critical determinants of plant survival. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has established Hardiness Zones based on average minimum temperature of a given area. Most of Southeast Michigan falls within USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 5, although small patches of the metropolitan Detroit area fall in Zone 6b.3 Precipitation Because different plants require varying amounts of water to survive, the amount of rainfall a site receives is one of the most critical factors in determining appropriate plants for that site. Sun Exposure Exposure to sunlight is another critical factor in landscape planning. Plants are categorized by the amount of sunlight they require in order to thrive. Categories refer to the relative proportion of sunlight and shade that a given site receives throughout the day: full-sun, partial shade (or partial sun), and full-shade. It is important to be aware of when and where a site receives sunlight and to plant accordingly. For example, the south/southwest sides of sites in North America tend to be shaded during the summer and sunny in the winter.4 Wind Direction Although not as critical in ornamental landscape planning, wind direction is a critical factor in planting vegetation to minimize the effects of fugitive dust. Wind carries dust and particulates away from sources, often with significant implications for area residents and employees who live and work downwind from those sources. Consequently, site assessments ought to consider the direction wind blows across a site and to place plants in a manner that offers

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

63

maximum protection to neighboring uses. Implications 1. Average monthly rainfall in the Detroit metropolitan area ranges from approximately 1.9 to 3.5 inches.5 The months with the most precipitation tend to be June and September, with significant rainfall also occurring anywhere from April to September. Plants selected for sites within the project area should be acclimated to these precipitation levels and seasonal changes. 2. Information about sun exposure should be used in deciding where to place plants. Shady trees, for example, are not as desirable in spots that are shaded during summer months, and they may not grow as well with limited exposure to sunlight. Based on site investigations conducted throughout the project area, it is clear that most candidate sites for implementation of bioengineering strategies are wide-open and exposed. These lots tend to have few mature trees and often contain no structures to provide shade. Therefore, planting strategies focus on using plants that prefer full-sun. 3. Throughout the project area, prevailing winds blow from the southwest toward the northeast. Consequently, planting schemes for each site should be designed with masses or rows of trees and shrubs in a northwest-southeast orientation (perpendicular to the wind) whenever possible to achieve maximum protection. The USFS and the Center for Urban Forest Research recommend developing a broad range of planting strategies, including both current conditions and a variety of potential future conditions (including no change in conditions), considering impacts of the plants anywhere from 10 to 40 years into the future.6 To the extent that it is feasible when designing a planting scheme, landscape architects and site designers should take into account current and future site conditions and how plants will mature over time. Analyzing site conditions and plant characteristics will help ensure that a site remains an environment in which plants can thrive, yielding the highest potential level of pollution mitigation. Plant Selection and Plant List Because the purpose of this project is to remediate fugitive dust pollution with bioengineering strategies, the functional characteristics of plant species are extremely important. Appendix B includes a list of appropriate trees, shrubs, and herbaceous ground covers based on relevant criteria, including mature height, density, hardiness, precipitation needs, and growth habitat. This plant list is designed to provide guidelines for selecting the plants based on their ability to minimize fugitive dust. Appropriate plants are well-adapted to the local climate, and thus this list includes mostly native species. Native

64

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

plants minimize maintenance and watering needs and are able to withstand extremes in local temperature and precipitation. While the list focuses on native species, it also includes non-native evergreen species with dense, coarse leaves. Plants with denser canopies more effectively filter and absorb air pollutants than those with porous canopies. Invasive species were carefully excluded from the list to avoid damage to beneficial and desirable plants. Additional Benefits of Vegetation Planting vegetation on a site provides benefits that extend beyond improving air quality. Vegetation is also useful in enhancing soil and plays a significant role in managing water quality as well. Air pollution particulates that are not absorbed or filtered through tree canopies collect on the ground where there is a higher potential for them to be dispersed into the air by passing traffic and other activity. They are also frequently carried away in runoff from rain events, as stormwater. Poorly managed stormwater runoff can exacerbate this problem, spreading pollutants across roads and lots, depositing large quantities of sediment in the path of vehicles. While bioengineering strategies discussed throughout this section focus on removing particulates from the air, those that include plants with broad canopies may be used to prevent fugitive dust generation that results from buildup of sediment in streets due to stormwater runoff.7 Providing proper stormwater drainage and directing runoff into natural filtration areas prevents water erosion and sediment runoff onto roads. Bioengineering techniques that focus on collecting and filtering stormwater through areas planted with trees, grasses and shrubs can alleviate this problem. Fugitive dust mitigation strategies should include stormwater management techniques in order to more comprehensively address pollution and achieve greater reductions in potential future generation of fugitive dust. Appendix D contains an overview of four common stormwater management strategies that use vegetation to mitigate runoff and help diminish pollution potential. Site Selection Process We identified vacant or underused properties that have the potential to serve as vegetative buffers. Over the course of two months, our team scrutinized aerial imagery and conducted groundtruthing visits to identify over 50 potential sites (see Figure 12 and Appendix E). While vegetative bioengineering strategies can be effective on any sized property, we targeted sites over one acre in area. While the suitability of each site for vegetation varies according to site characteristics, soil quality, and climate, this area-wide inventory indicates the potential range of sites possible for vegetative mitigation. From our initial inventory of over fifty sites, we narrowed our selection based on the criteria that vegetation should be planted close to dust sources and serve as a buffer for residential neighborhoods. We used information from the 2000 U.S. census to identify block level populations. Sites located within or near

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

65

densely populated blocks were given priority. We also used GIS software to determine which sites were located closest to dense areas of fugitive dust sources. Using a combination of these two criteria, we prioritized and selected our demonstration sites based upon identification of ownership and on-the-ground investigation. The result is a short list of four sites for which bioengineering strategies will be most effective given their proximity to both residential areas and fugitive dust sources. An analysis of current conditions and a prosposed planting strategy for each of the four sites is detailed on the following pages.
Figure 12: Potential Sites for Bioengineering Strategies

66

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Site # 1 – Mellon/Dix
Current Conditions: This six-acre site is currently owned by KDR Land Corporation. The lot is in a high-traffic area amidst numerous trucking facilities, storage piles, and unpaved lots. The lot is unpaved and used as a truck storage yard with vehicles frequently entering and exiting. Directly to the southeast is an unpaved equipment storage facility, while an active storage pile sits to the northwest. Both Mellon Road and Dix Road are major truck routes and experience high volumes of industrial traffic. Proposed Strategy: This site represents both a source of fugitive dust as well as an opportunity to plant vegetation to capture ambient particle pollution, thus the recommended strategy is source-specific. Because of the high traffic volumes in and around the site, it is unlikely that most vegetation will survive on the site itself. In lieu of stabilizing the site with vegetation, we propose covering the unpaved lot with variegated gravel, which will withstand the weight of the trucks and suppress dust. We also propose planting a ring of conifers, such as Colorado Spruce and Austrian Pine, around the edges of the site. It is important to stagger the trees and space them far enough apart (roughly twenty feet) to allow them to fill out as they mature. This will maximize their exposed surface area and allow them to absorb more dust particles. Planting trees around this site will not only absorb ambient dust but will also prevent the wind from carrying dust off this lot.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

67

Site # 46 – Ormond St/ Luther St
Current Conditions: This 1.8-acre site serves as a buffer between the single-family residential area to the east and the industrial area to the west. It is currently owned by the Global Gas Corporation. The prevailing wind tends to blow from nearby unpaved industrial areas into the adjacent residential area. Thus, vegetation will create a natural buffer to protect residents. Currently, sparse deciduous trees surround the otherwise treeless site. A fence runs along the site’s northwestern edge. Proposed Strategy: The deciduous trees along the site edges will be augmented with a row of coniferous trees in order to take advantage of the “edge effect” and create more surface area to capture airborne dust. Species such the Austrian or Scotch Pine are useful in screens and masses and are therefore good choices for this site. Since there is no heavily used trucking route adjacent to the site, the vegetation will serve to collect dust being blown from nearby unpaved industrial yards.

68

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Site # 47 – Pleasant St/Beatrice St
Current conditions: The property is 4.9 acres and is currently owned by the Detroit Public School Board. While the site has the potential to be a community park, it was recently fenced due to the discovery of arsenic. As such, any earth-moving activities will need to be conducted with care. It should be noted that the possibility of contamination does not prohibit a tree planting strategy from being successful; indeed, trees can often be used for phytoremediation, which refers to trees’ ability to clean soil through nutrient uptake. Even in the case of arsenic, depending on the level of contamination, robust trees should not suffer damage and will be able to survive. The adjacent property to the northeast (leeward side) of this demonstration site is currently undergoing construction and there is heavy industrial activity to the north, creating large amounts of truck traffic on Pleasant Street. This property is also surrounded by a dense single-family residential area and thus is in the transition zone from residential to industrial land uses. Proposed Strategy: This site allows ample room to demonstrate the proper use of multi-row wind breaks while still allowing public access to open space pending issues of contamination. The wind breaks would be planted perpendicular to the prevailing wind direction in order to reduce ground-level wind speeds. Windbreaks reduce wind speed most effectively when spaced within four to five times the height of the trees used. For example, if the tree species planted will be 30 feet tall, the wind rows should be spaced 120 to 150 feet apart. Effective trees for windbreaks include Austrian and Scotch pines. In addition, there will be a thick row of trees around the edges of the property, while leaving one edge more open in order to facilitate park use by the surrounding community members. We recommend using a mix of deciduous trees, such as the Hackberry or Hawthorne, around the edges of the site for visual appeal.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

69

Site # 49 – Marion Ave
Current Conditions: This site is situated among one of the most industrial portions of the study area. It consists of a narrow strip of land approximately thirty feet wide along Marion Avenue. This site is strategically important because of its proximity to nearby neighborhoods. The site borders heavy industry to the southeast along the Detroit River and can therefore serve as a buffer between these sources of particulate pollution and residential areas. The land is currently owned by ITC Holdings Corp. and serves as a utility corridor, so therefore it is important to allow access to the utility towers on the site for service and maintenance. Proposed Strategy: In order to effectively function as a buffer year-round we propose planting two rows of small to medium conifers, such as White Fir or Colorado Spruce. Trees should be offset from one another to allow maximum surface area exposure and achieve the desired moderate porosity. The rough surface of these trees will serve to capture and absorb particles kicked up by passing traffic along the alley (between the utility strip and residences) and Marion Avenue.

70

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

1 2 3

Russ, 343. Keefer, 92.

National Gardening Association. (2008). Retrieved March 12, 2008 from http://www. garden.org/zipzone/index.php.
4

Russ, 346.

5 rssWeather.com. (2007). Climate for Detroit, Michigan. Retrieved March 8, 2008 from http://www.rssweather.com/climate/Michigan/Detroit/. 6 7

United States Forest Service and The Center for Urban Forest Research, 3. Metro, 48.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

71

72

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

8

Conclusion

Due to the intermingling of residential and industrial land uses in Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn, area residents are constantly in contact with industrial activity and are exposed to its negative side effects. One of the most overlooked side effects is the harm caused by fugitive dust created by high levels of activity on unpaved and heavily used land. Fugitive dust creates a number of adverse health impacts including increased blood pressure, arrhythmia, decreased heart response, and asthma. Given these effects and the increasing levels of particulate pollution in the area, a creative plan to address fugitive dust mitigation is necessary. In an effort to improve the overall health and welfare of local communities, this report highlights the fugitive dust problem that exists in Southeast Michigan. This report demonstrates the effectiveness of using vegetation as a long-term, cost-effective strategy to manage fugitive dust. Vegetation may be used to supplement shorter-term mechanical solutions that primarily block or suppress particulate matter in the form of fugitive dust. Specifically, vegetation reduces fugitive dust by absorbing and filtering airborne particulates, reducing local temperature variability, and blocking wind and airborne particles. In order to demonstrate these strategies in practice, this report identifies a number of specific bioengineering techniques that can be used on a variety of sites with differing characteristics. 1. Plant vegetation as close to a fugitive dust source as possible 2. Plant larger rather than smaller vegetation where possible (i.e. trees and shrubs rather than grasses or herbaceous groundcover) 3. Maximize exposed surface area by arranging plants to create edges rather than clusters 4. Construct windbreaks using multiple rows of plants of varied height and moderate porosity 5. Plant a mixture of coniferous and deciduous vegetation.
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 73

Each of these techniques can maximize the effectiveness of vegetation in dust mitigation. They are appropriate not only for the highlighted sites within the study area, but can also serve as templates for sites in areas where fugitive dust poses health risks outside of Southeastern Michigan. Implementing these recommendations will require efforts from a variety of community partners. Appendix F provides a list of various organizations in Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn whose goals, interests, and missions align with the objectives established in this report. These organizations can serve as ideal partners, providing a variety of resources to facilitate the realization of techniques put forth in this report. Mitigating fugitive dust using the strategies outlined in this report requires the collaboration and cooperation of local stakeholders, business leaders, and residents. These organizations and individuals play a vital role in achieving project goals because they bring the resources and skills required to implement the planting of vegetation to reduce fugitive dust generation, as well as placing vegetation in strategic locations to decrease residents’ exposure to particulate matter. Southwest Detroit and Southeastern Dearborn have a number of stakeholders that work to increase the quality of life for local residents. We have identified many organizations that are potentially interested in helping reduce particulate matter exposure in the area. Given its demonstrated success, bioengineering can play a greater role in enhancing long-term pollution mitigation. Using this report as a guide, industry leaders, community organizations, residents, and other stakeholders throughout southeastern Michigan can take advantage of the aesthetic and functional benefits of vegetation as a cost-effective land use practice in suppressing airborne particulates and improving the local environment for all.

74

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Bibliography
Adams, B. J. & Papa, F. (2000). Urban Stormwater Management Planning with analytical Probabilistic Models. New York: John Wiley Sons, Inc., 53-54. Ahrens, D. (2003). Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc. Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project Website. Retrieved November 24, 2007 from http://www.ambassadorbridge.com/ambassador-project.html. American Forests. (2006). Urban Ecosystem Analysis: SE Michigan and City of Detroit. Washington, DC: American Forests. Arab American Institute. Arab Americans. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://www.aaiusa.org/foundation/358/arab-americans. Armijo, B. Controlling Dust a Must. (2004, February 6). The Albuquerque Journal. Retrieved October 19, 2007 from http://www.abqjournal.com/news/ metro/142011metro02-06-04.htm. Atmosphere, Climate and Environment Information Programme. (2000). Encyclopedia of Atmospheric Environment: Acid Deposition. Retrieved December 6, 2007 from http://www.ace.mmu.ac.uk/eae/Acid_Rain/Older/Acid_Deposition.html. Balestrini, R. & Tagliaferri. (2001). A. Dry deposition of particles and canopy exchange: Comparison of wet, bulk and throughfall deposition at five forest sites in Italy. Atmospheric Environment. 35(36), 6421-6433. Baulch, V., Zacharias, P. (1997). The Rouge Plant – the art of history. The Detroit News, July 11, 1997. Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H., & Taylor, G. (1998). Urban woodlands: their role in reducing the effects of particulate pollution. Environmental Pollution, 99, 347-360. Belton, P. In the Way of the Prophet: Ideologies and Institutions in Dearborn, Michigan, America’s Muslim Capitol, The Next American City, (3), Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://americancity.org/magazine/article/in-the-wayof-the-prophet-ideologies-and-institutions-belton/. Bonisteel, S. (2007) Fox News. In Detroit, It’s the Mexicans Welcoming Visitors to America, January 11, 2007, Retrieved March 3, 2008, from www. foxnews.com/story/0,2933,243180,00.html. Cardelino, C.A. & Chameides, W.L. (1990). Natural hydrocarbons, urbanization, and urban ozone. Journal of Geophysical Research, 95(D9), 13, 971-979.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

75

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council. Air Pollutants Explained. Retrieved November 1, 2007 from http://www.bradford.gov.uk/environment/environmental_protection/environmental_monitoring/air_pollutants.htm. City of Detroit (2004). Retrieved February 21, 2008 from http://www.ci.detroit. mi.us/plandevl/advplanning/pdfs/MPlan/MPlan_2004/Master%20Plan%20 Revision%20-%20Citywide%20Policies.pdf. City of Detroit, Master Plan. (2004). 5-11. Retrieved February 16, 2008 from http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/plandevl/advplanning/pdfs/MPlan/MPlan_2004/ Cluster5. City of Detroit, Master Plan. (2004). Table 5-6. Compliance with the Air Regulatory Requirements for Particulate Matter Generation. City of New York. (2006). PlaNYC: A Greener, Greater New York. Davis, A. P. & McCuen, R. H. (2005). Stormwater Management for Smart Growth. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., 4. Delfino, R. J., Constantinos S., & Malik, S. (2005) Potential role of ultrafine particles in associations between airborne particle mass and cardiovascular health. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(8), 934. Detroit Kids Data. Retrieved November 7, 2007 from http://www.detroitkidsdata.org. Detroit River International Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Section 2 “Alternatives”, p. 52. Retrieved February 11, 2008 from http://www. partnershipborderstudy.com/reports_us.asp. Detroit River International Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The Environment: What’s There Now and What are the Impacts. Detroit Water and Sewerage Department. Retrieved March 3, 2008, from http://www.dwsd.org/history/sewerage_brief.html. Dines, N. & Brown, K. (2001). Landscape Architect’s Portable Handbook. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill. Dockery, D., Pope, C., Xiping, X., Spengler, J. et al. (1993). An Association between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six U.S. Cities. New England Journal of Medicine, 329,1753-1759. Draft Environmental Assessment for Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project. (2007). Appendix K, 5. Retrieved November 24, 2007, from http://www. ambassadorbridge.com/drafts/Appendix_K_Air_Quality.pdf. Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal (DIFT), Section 1, 17. DTE Energy. Retrieved March 3, 2008, from http://dteenergy.mediaroom. com.

76

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Environmental & Water Resources Institute. (2001). Guide for Best Management Practice (BMP) Selection in Urban Developed Areas. The American Society of Civil Engineers, 35-36. Freer-Smith, P.H., Beckett, K.P., & Taylor, G. (2005). Deposition velocities to Sorbus aria, Acer campestre, Populus deltoides X trichocarpa ‘Beaupre’, Pinus nigra and X Cupressocyparis leylandii for coarse, fine and ultra-fine particles in the urban environment. Environmental Pollution, 133, 157-167. Gateway Community Development Cooperative. (2007). Comments to the US Coast Guard Regarding the Ambassador Bridge Expansion Project. August 30, 2007, 8. Grantz, D. A. & Vaughan D. L. (2003). Factors in Plant Survival for Revegetation in the Antelope Valley for Particulate Matter Control. Government Reports Announcements & Index, 8. Grantz, D. A., Vaughn D. L., Metheny P.A., & Malkus, P. (1995). Effect of Canopy Structure and Open-Top Chamber Techniques on Micrometeorological Parameters and the Gradients and Transport of Water Vapor, Carbon Dioxide and Ozone in the Canopies of Plum Trees (‘Prunus salicina’) in the San Joaquin Valley. California Air Resources Board. Keefer, R. F. (2000). Handbook of Soils for Landscape Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press. Keeler, G. J., Dvonch T., Yip F., Parker E. A., Israel B. A., Marsik F. J., et al. (2002) Assessment of personal and community-level exposures to particulate matter among children with asthma in Detroit, Michigan, as part of Community Action Against Asthma (CAAA). Environmental Health Perspectives 110(2),173–181. Klug, T. (1999). Railway Cars, Bricks, and Salt: The Industrialization of Southwest Detroit before Auto. Marygrove College, November 5, 1999. Retrieved March 3, 2008, from http://www.marygrove.edu/ids/papers/Southwest_Detroit_Before_Auto_Klug.pdf. Leuty, T. (2004). Using Shelterbelts to Reduce Odors Associated with Livestock Production Barns. Retrieved November 20, 2007 from http://www. omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/info_odours.htm. Levi, E. (1968). The Distribution of Mineral Elements Following Leaf and Root Uptake. Physiologia Plantarum, 21(1), p. 213-226. Lewis, T. C., Robins, T. G., Dvonch, J. T., Keeler, G. J., Fuyuen, Y. (2005). Air Pollution–Associated Changes in Lung Function among Asthmatic Children in Detroit. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(1068)175. Lovett, G. & Lindberg, S.E. (1984). Dry Deposition and Canopy Exchange in a Mixed Oak Forest as Determined by Analysis of Throughfall. The Journal of Applied Ecology, 21(3), 1013-1027. ----------- (1986). Dry deposition of nitrate to a deciduous forest. Biogeochemistry, 2(2), 137-148.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

77

Magari, S., Schwartz, J., Williams, P., Hauser, R., Smith, T. & Christiani, D. (2002). The association of particulate air metal concentrations with heart rate variability. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110, 875-879. McDonald, A.G., Bealey, W.J., Fowler, D. et al. (2007). Quantifying the effect of urban tree planting on concentrations and depositions of PM10 in two UK conurbations. Atmospheric Environment, 41, 8455-8467. Metro. (2002). Green Streets: Innovative Solutions for Stormwater and Stream Crossings. Portland, OR: Metro. Michigan Department of Community Health. (2002). Preventable Hospitalizations and Rates per 10,000 Population for Patients under 18 Years of Age by Selected Leading Diagnoses, 1996–2000. Lansing, MI: Division for Vital Records and Statistics. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2005). Managing Fugitive Dust: A Guide for Compliance with the Air Regulatory Requirements for Particulate Matter Generation. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2006). 2005 Annual Air Quality Report. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from http://www.deq.state. mi.us/documents/deq-aqd-air-reports-05AQReport.pdf. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2006) Annual Air Quality Report. 27-35. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from http://michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-aqd-air-reports-06AQReport_216544_7.pdf. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2007). Air Quality Regulations. Retrieved January 23, 2008, from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-ess-p2tas-FVGuidech1_199604_7.pdf. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2007). Dust and Fallout. Retrieved February 16, 2008 from http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135 -3310_4148-11396--,00.html. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Particulate Matter (2.5). Retrieved February 11, 2008, from http://michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-aqd-air-aqe-sippm25-1-14-08_223446_7.pdf. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (draft). Lansing, MI. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5). Retrieved February 13, 2008, from http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3310---,00.html. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Fugitive Dust Control Letter Sample, obtained March 8, 2008. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). State Implementation Plan Submittal for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), 30.
78 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (n.d.). State Implementation Plan Overview. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.michigan. gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3310_30151_30154---,00.html. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (2007). Michigan’s Geological Landscape. Retrieved February 2, 2008, from http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0 ,1607,7-153-10370_22664-60296--,00.html. Michigan Department of Transportation. (2005). Context Sensitive Solutions Policy, adopted May 26, 2005, Retrieved November 21, 2007 from http:// www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,7-151-9621_41446---,00.html. Missouri Natural Resources Conservation Services. (2004). Windbreak/Shelterbelt-Odor Control. United States Department of Agriculture. National Gardening Association. (2008). USDA Hardiness Zone Finder. Retrieved March 12, 2008 from http://www.garden.org/zipzone/index.php. National Resources Defense Council. (2006). Rooftops to Rivers: Green Strategies for Controlling Stormwater and Combined Sewer Overflows. Nowak, D.J. (1994). Air pollution removal by Chicago’s urban forest. In McPherson, E.G, Nowak, D.J. and Rowntree, R.A. (Eds), Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NE-186 (63-81). Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. ---------- (N.D.). The Effect of Urban Trees on Air Quality. (1994). Syracuse, NY: USDA Forest Service. Nowak, D.J., Civerolo, K.L., Rao, S.T., Sistla, S., Luley, C.J., & Crane, D.E. (2000). A modeling study of the impact of urban trees on ozone. Atmospheric Environment, 34, 1601-1613. Nowak, D. J., Crane, D. E., & Stevens, J. C. (2006). Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 4, 115-123. Nowak, D.J., McHale P.J., Ibarra, M., Crane, D., Stevens, J., & Luley, C. (1998). Modeling the effects of urban vegetation on air pollution, In S. Gryning and N. Chaumerliac, (Eds.), Air Pollution Modeling and Its Application XII. (399-408). New York: Plenum Press. Pidwirny, M. (2007). Chapter 8: Introduction to the hydrosphere. Physical Geography. Retrieved January 20, 2007 from http://www.physicalgeography. net/fundamentals/8k.html. Pope, C., Bates, D., & Raizenned, M. (1995). Health Effects of Particulate Air Pollution: Time for Reassessment? Environmental Health Perspectives, 103(5), 472-480. Ritchie, I. (2007). Effects of PM2.5 on Children’s Health in Indiana. Issue Paper for: Summit for Children’s Environmental Health at Indiana University-

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

79

Purdue University Indianapolis. Retrieved November 1, 2007, from http://www.ceh.iu.edu/Documents/Fine%20Particles.pdf. Rowland, A.J., Drew, M.C., & Wellburn, A.R. (1987). Foliar Entry and Incorporation of Atmospheric Nitrogen Dioxide Into Barley Plants of Different Nitrogen Status. New Phytologist, 107(2), 357-371. rssWeather.com. (2007). Climate for Detroit, Michigan. Retrieved March 8, 2008 from http://www.rssweather.com/climate/Michigan/Detroit/. Russ, T. H. (2002). Site Planning and Design Handbook. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (2003). Regional Development Forecast Community Detail Report. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from http:// library.semcog.org/InmagicGenie/DocumentFolder/RegionalDevelopmentFor ecast_2030CommunityDetail.pdf. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (2007). Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Conformity Analysis of the for the Proposed Amendment of SEMCOG’s 2030 Regional Transportation Plan for Southeast Michigan. Stalfelt, M. G. (1962). The Effect of Temperature on Opening of the Stomatal Cells. Physiologia Plantarum, 15(4), 772-779. The Columbia Encyclopedia. (2007). Detroit, City, United States. Sixth Edition. The Henry Ford: The Living Roof. Retrieved March 3, 2008 from http://www. thehenryford.org/rouge/livingroof.asp. The National Conference of State Legislatures. (2005). EPA finalizes Clean Air Interstate Rule. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from http://www.ncsl.org/ programs/environ/air/EPAairrule.htm. United States Census. (2000). Retrieved March 2, 2008, from http://www. census.gov. United States Census. (2003). The Arab Population: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. December 2003, Retrieved February 16, 2008 from http://www.census. gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-23.pdf. United States Department of Commerce. National Climatic Data Center. (2005). United States Climate Normals 1971-2000. Retrieved November 13, 2007 from www.ncdc.noaa.gov/normals.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1996). Nonpoint Source Pollution: The Nation’s Largest Water Quality Problem. Retrieved December 04, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/facts/point1.htm. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2004). National Center for Environmental Assessment: Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter (October 2004). Retrieved October 29, 2007 from http://cfpub2.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ recordisplay.cfm?deid=87903.

80

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Michigan; Revised Format of 40 CFR Part 52 for Materials Being Incorporated by Reference. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2006/September/ Day-06/a14708.htm. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Final Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution (Particulate Matter). United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Health and Environment. Retrieved November 28, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/aor//particlepollution/health.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Particulate Matter: Health and Environment. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://www.epa. gov/oar/particlepollution/health.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Clean Air Interstate Rule: Basic Information. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/ cair/basic.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Criteria Pollutants. Retrieved November 2, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/ o3co.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Detroit RiverWestern Lake Erie Basin Indicator Project. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/med/grosseile_site/indicators/wetlands.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Great Lakes Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction: Detroit River Area of Concern. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/detroit.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Green Book. Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (last updated, December 21, 2007), Retrieved March 4, 2007, from http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Midwest Clean Diesel Initiative: U.S./Canada Border Areas. Retrieved January 11, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/midwestcleandiesel/sectors/border/index.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Particulate Matter. Retrieved November 15, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Particulate Matter. Retrieved February 15, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/ basic.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Reducing Particle Pollution. Retrieved November 15, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/reducing.html.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

81

United States Forest Service and The Center for Urban Forest Research. (2006). Trees – the Air Pollution Solution. Davis, CA: The Center for Urban Forest Research. United States National Arboretum. (1990). USDA Plant Hardiness Zones Map. Retrieved March 8, 2008 from: http://www.usna.usda.gov/Hardzone/ hzm-ne1.html. Vorenberg, S. Getting a fix on state’s dust problem starts at the border and fans up. (2006, January 22). The Albuquerque Tribune. Retrieved October 20, 2007 from http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2006/jan/22/getting-a-fix-onstates-dust-problem-starts-at/. Washington Administrative Code Regulation 173-400-040 (8)(a), 2. Washington State Department of Ecology. (2003). Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program, Techniques for Dust Prevention and Suppression.

82

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Appendix A: Health Research

Respiratory Research The following articles provide information and findings on the adverse respiratory affects from human exposure to PM. Two of the articles include longitudinal cohort studies of primary-school children with asthma in Detroit, Michigan. They include the investigation of exposure to both ambient PM10 and PM2.5. The findings indicate that levels of air pollutants have adverse affects on an individual’s lung function, particularly asthmatic children and the elderly. Another article presents findings on (Berhane, 2006) the relationship of local traffic-related PM exposure and asthma. The study was conducted in southern California and includes school children ages 5-7. Questionnaires provided diagnosed asthma and prevalent asthma information for the analysis. Using parental history of asthma and children’s’ history of allergic symptoms, sex, and early-life exposure as variables, exposure was assessed by the proximity to a major road and by modeling exposure to local traffic-related pollutants. Residence within 75 meters of a major road was associated with an increased risk of lifetime asthma. The last report provides area-specific information related to asthma in Wayne County, Michigan. Asthma rates are divided into a number of categories, including: total population, age, sex, and race. The report highlights the degree to which Wayne County residents suffer from asthma. For instance, the hospitalization rate for asthma in Wayne County is two times that of the State of Michigan. Berhane, K., McConnel, R., Yao, L., Jerret, M., Lurmann, F., Gilliland, F., et al. (2006). Traffic, Susceptibility, and Childhood Asthma. [Electronic version] Environmental Health Perspective, 114(5), 766–772. Keeler, G., Dvonch, T., Robins, T., Parker, E., Israel, B., Yip, F., et al. (2004). Personal exposures to particulate matter among children with asthma in Detroit, Michigan. [Electronic version] Atmospheric Environment, 39, 5227–5236. Lewis, T., Robins, T., Dvonch, T., Keeler, G., Yip, F., Mentz, G., et al. (2005). Air Pollution–Associated Changes in Lung Function among Asthmatic Children in Detroit. [Electronic version] Environmental Health Perspectives, 113, 1068-1075. Wasilevich, E. (2005). Epidemiology of Asthma In Wayne County, Michigan. Michigan Department of Community Health. Retrieved October 12, 2007 from www.getasthmahelp.org/Wayne%20Fact%20 Sheet%202005.pdf. Cardiovascular Research The four following articles consist of research on autonomic nervous system. The autonomic nervous system is part of the nervous system responsible for the control of bodily functions that are not consciously controlled. These included, for instance, the human heartbeat, breathing, and the digestive process. Each of the articles examines human exposure to PM and finds that the disturbance of the autonomic nerUniversity of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 83

vous system is a response to PM2.5 exposure. Liao, D., Creason, J., Shy, C., Williams, R., Watts, R., & Zweidinger, R. (1999). Daily of particulate air pollution and poor cardiac autonomic control in the elderly. [Electronic version] Environmental Health Perspectives,107, 521-525. Litonjua A., Gold, D., Schwartz, J., Lovett, E., Larson, A., Nearing, B., et al. (2000). Ambient Pollution and Heart Rate Variability. [Electronic version] Circulation, 101, 1267-1273. Magari, S., Hauser, R., Schwartz, J., Williams, P., Smith, T., & Christiani, D. (2001). The association of heart rate variability with occupational and environmental exposure to particulate air pollution. [Electronic version] Circulation, 104, 986-991. Pope, C., Verrier, R., Lovett, E., Larson, A., Raizenne, M., Kanner, R., et al. (1999).Heart rate variability associated with particulate air pollution. [Electronic version] American Heart Journal,138, 890-899. The following three articles go a step further and research how air pollution influences the autonomic system. They indicate that the disturbance of the autonomic system from exposure to PM may be induced directly through a sympathetic stress response or indirectly by inflammatory cytokines produced in the lungs and released into the circulation. This means that the disturbance is either (1) induced as a result of the sympathetic nervous system, a part of the autonomic nervous system, responding to PM exposure as a threat to the body or (2) the immune system, when it is combating pathogens, uses cytokines to signals immune system fighting cells to help fight the bodily threat. Godleski, J., Verrier, R., Koutrakis, P., Catalano, P., Coull, B., Reinisch, U., et al. (2000). Mechanisms of Morbidity and Mortality from Exposure to Ambient Air Particles. Research Report 91. Cambridge, MA: Health Effects Institute. Magari S, Schwartz J, Williams P, Hauser R, Smith T, & Christiani D. (2002). The association of particulate air metal concentrations with heart rate variability. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110, 875-879. Monn, C. & Becker, S. (1999). Cytotoxicity and induction of proinflammatory cytokines from human monocytes exposed to fine (PM2.5) and coarse particles (PM10-2.5) in outdoor and indoor air. [Electronic version] Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology,155, 245-252. Quay, J., Reed, W., Samet, J., & Devlin, R. (1998). Air pollution particles induce IL-6 gene expression in human airway epithelial cells via NF-kappaB activation. American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology, 19, 98-106.

84

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Appendix B: Plant List
The following are descriptions of the categories on the plant list: Plant Names Common names for plants vary by geographical area. This list includes both a common and a scientific name. The plant species included are categorized as trees, shrubs, herbaceous ground covers, and grasses. We have also identified which species are deciduous or evergreen. Moisture Needs All plants have specific needs for water in order to survive. Based on these needs, we have categorized the plants in following three categories: H = wet (Hydric), M = moist (Mesic), X = dry (Xeric). For sites in the project area, we have selected plant species that tolerate moderate or dry conditions. Light Needs Similar to moisture requirements, plants also have specific needs in terms of exposure to sunlight. Plants are categorized in this list based on their light needs as follows: F = full sun, P = partial sun, S = shade. Given local conditions, we have selected plant species that tolerate full or partial sun. Soil Type Plants also have specific requirements for the type of soil they need in order to grow properly. Soil types range from sandy to clay. This list refers to soil type as follows: Soil Type: S = sand, L = loam, C = clay Plant Form Plant form refers to the general appearance of the plant. Plant form is categorized as listed below: C = columnar, H = horizontal, I = irregular, M = mounded, O = oval, R = rounded, S = spreading Mature Height Plants vary in mature height depending on the species and growth habit. Mature height is provided in feet. Mature Width Similarly, plants vary in mature width depending on the species and growth habit. Width is useful for determining appropriate plant spacing. Mature width is provided in feet. Native Plants in the list that are native to Michigan are followed by a star (*). Pollen Pollen is technically an element of airborne particulate matter and can exacerbate respiratory problems. Major pollen producing plants in the list are followed by a double star (**). Maintenance Plants are ranked based on the amount of maintenance they need using a scale of one 1 to 3, where 3 indicates maximum maintenance and 1 indicates the lowest maintenance. Average Cost This list also contains information about the average cost of plants. Prices are based on quotes from a number of nurseries in Michigan. Comments Apart from structural and physiological characteristics, plants also have functional characteristics. These functions vary from plant to plant based on their form, root habits, and canopy density and architecture. The list briefly describes functional characteristics and salt/drought tolerance. Air Quality Information We included an air quality benefit ranking for trees and shrubs. Scores range from 1 to 4, with 1 representing average benefits and 4 representing high benefits. Plants with coarse leaf texture and a dense canopy year-round will capture and filter more particulates and were assigned a higher score. Deciduous plants with fine leaf texture are not as effective and were assigned a lower rank.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

85

TREES
Botanical Name TALL (50" - 100"+) Evergreens Abies concolor* Picea abies* Pinus nigra* Picea pungens* Pinus resinosa* Pinus strobus* Pinus sylvestris* Deciduous Acer nigrum** Acer rubrum** Betula alleghaniensis** Carya cordiformis Carya glabra Carya ovata Fagus grandifolia Gleditsia triacanthos Gymnocladus diocia Juglans nigra Liriodendron tulipifera Morus rubra** Platanus occidentalis** Populus deltoides** Populus grandidentata** Quercus alba** Quercus imbricaria** Quercus macrocarpa** Quercus rubra** Quercus velutina** Tilia americana Betula papyrifera** Castanea dentata Maple, black Maple, red Birch, yellow Hickory, bitternut Hickory, pignut Hickory, shagbark Beech, American Honey locust Kentucky coffee tree Walnut, black Tuliptree Red mulberry Sycamore Eastern cottonwood Big-toothed aspen Oak, white Oak, shingle Oak, bur Oak, red Oak, black Basswood Birch, paper American chestnut 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 3 D D D D D M D D M P D M D D M D M D D M D M D O O R/O O I/O I/O O R I/O I/O O C I/R O O S/R P R R O O NA E 75-100' 75-100' 45-75' 45-75' 45-60' 55-65' 55-80' 60!85' 60-75' 55-80' 45-90' 70' 75'"!"90' 190' 65' 55-75' 50-90' 55-75' 60-90' 55-70' 55-70' 40-70' 100' 50-75' 50-75' 30-35' 75-100' 35-50' 35-50' 70-120' NA 40-50' 50-75' 35-50' 35-50' 60'"!"70' 75!100' 20!40' 70-100' 60-70' 70-80' 60-75' 25-50' 30-60' 20-30' NA L S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C L L S/L S/L S/L S/L/C S/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C L S/L/C S/L L L S/LC L H/M H/M H/M M M/X M/X M H/M/X M M M M/X M H H M/X H/M M/X M M/X M M M F/P/S F//S F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P/S S F F/P F/P F/P/S F F F F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P/S F F Concolor (white) Fir Norway Spruce Austrian Pine Colorado spruce Red Pine White Pine Scotch Pine 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 D D D D M D D C C C C C C C 30'-50' 40'-60' 50'-60' 30'-60' 50'-80' 50'-80' 30'-60' 15-20' 25-30' 20-40' 10-20' NA 20-40' 30-40' S/L S/L L/C S/L S/L L S/L M M M M M/X M M F/P/S F/P F F/P F F/P F Common Name Air Quality Benefits Canopy Density Plant Form Mature Height Mature Width Soil Type Moisture Needs Light Needs

MEDIUM (30' - 50') Evergreens Abies balsamea* Juniperus virginiana** Picea glauca* Thuja occidentalis* Deciduous Balsam fir Cedar, eastern redWhite spruce Cedar, northern white4 4 4 4 D D D D P C/P C P 30-60' 30-45' 40"!"60' 30-45' 20'-25' 8-20' 10"!"20"' 20-30' L/C S/L S/C S/L M M/X H/M/X H/M P/S F/P F/P/S F/P

Celtis'Occidentalis**
Nyssa sylvatica Ostrya virginiana Populus tremuloides** Prunus serotina Quercus bicolor** Quercus muehlenbergii** Salix nigra** Sassafras albidum SMALL (10' - 30') Deciduous Asimina triloba Carpinus carolinana Cercis canadensis Cornus florida Crataegus crus-galli Malus coronaria

Hackberry Blackgum Ironwood Aspen, trembling Cherry, black Oak, swamp white Oak, chinquapin Black willow Sassafras

3 3 1 2 1 2 2 1 2

D D M D M D D M M

R P P C C/O O I/O P/S I/P

35!55' 30-45' 25-40' 35-65' 35-60' 45-60' 35-45' 25-50' 20-45'

40!60' 20-30' 15-25' 20-30' 30-40' 50-60' 50-90' 20-35' 25-40'

S/L L S/L S/L/C L L/C S/L S/L/C S/L/C

H/M H/M M/X M/X M/X H/M/X M/X H/M M/X

F/P F/P F/P/S F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P/S F/P

Pawpaw Musclewood Redbud Dogwood, flowering Hawthorn, cockspur Crab apple, wild

2 2 2 1 2 3

M D M P D D

I O S/R H/O R I/R

10-15' 10-30' 10-25' 15-30' 20-30' 10-25'

15-20' 20-30' 25-35' 20-30' 20-35' 8-15'

L L S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C

H/M H/M M M/X M/X M/X

F/P/S F/P F/P F/P/S F/P F/P

86

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Unit size

Estimated Retail Cost

Other Comments

4'-5', 28" 4'-5', 28" 4'-5', 28" 4'-5', 28" 4'-5', 28" 4'-5', 28" 4'-5', 28"

$67 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60

Very adaptable; most prosperous of all firs for hot, dry conditions; medium drought tolerance Very adaptable, except to high heat; Prefers well-drained acidic soil; slow growth rate; medium tolerance Adaptable to high pH and heavy clay soil; establishes quickly; use in groupings & screening Doesn't do well in very moist soils; slow growth rate; medium drought tolerance NOT SALT TOLERANT, Best-suited to exposed, dry, acid sandy or gravelly soil NOT SALT TOLERANT, Does not tolerate high pH well; fast growth rate; great in groupings for screens and possibly in hedges Use for screening, massing; extremely adaptable to varied soil; medium drought tolerance

NA 2-3" B&B 1 gallon 1 gallon 18" root stock 2 containers NA 1 gallon 7 containers 1 gallon 2-2.5" B&B 5 containers 2-2.5" B&B 1 gallon 2 containers 2.5-3" 2-2.5" B&B 2-2.5" B&B 1 gallon 3 Gallon 2-2.5" B&B 1 gallon NA

NA $135 $14 $14 $6 $21 NA $14 $74 $14 $120 $43 $135 $14 $21 $240 $170 $170 $15 $19 $145 $14 NA

High heat and drought tolerance Shallow roots & low drought tolerance; won't tolerate alkaline soils Medium drought tolerance High Drought tolerance, intolerant of prolonged high water High drought tolerance Medium drought-tolerant High drought tolerance, shallow roots, does not do well with a lot of foot traffic Fast growing and good growth on variety of soils. High drought and Salt tolerance Branches high off ground, inhibits the growth of some plant families (Ericaceae, Pinaceae, Solanaceae) Somewhat weak-wooded and susceptible to breakage Medium drought tolerance No drought & Salinity tolerance Medium drought tolerance Fast growng Drought-tolerant; slow-growing Medium drought tolerance Slow-growing; drought-tolerant Relatively fast-growing Drought-tolerant Medium drough tolerance Low drought tolerance Species has nearly been exterminated by chestnut blight

4'-5', 28" 1 Gallon 24-30" Pot 4'-5', 28"

$60 $14 $30 $60

Does well in acidic soils, can appear spars; requires some protection from desiccating winds; Good windbreak High drought tolerance and intermediate salt tolerance Good hedge or windbreak

2!2.5'"B&B 25 Gal 2 containers 2 containers 1 Gallon 2-2.5" B&B 1 Gallon 2 containers NA

$160 $175 $21 $21 $14 $170 $15 $21 NA

Medium"drought"tolerance Requires shelter from wind; intolerant of pollution; prefers slightly acidic conditions Does not tolerate salt or compacted soil; sensitive to salt Does not tolerate flooding Leaves and twigs poisonous to livestock; susceptible to black knot Very adaptable Sensitive to soil compaction and foot traffic Seasonally to regurally flooded or saturated High drought tolerance but intolerant to salt

1 Gallon 2-2.5" B&B 6-7' B&B 1.75-2" B&B 2-2.5" B&B 1 gallon

$15 $160 $55 $95 $125 $14

Low drought tolerance but tolerant to salt Low drought tolerance but tolerant to salt Sensitive to salt Needs acidic soil Tolerates urban conditions Medium drought tolerance

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

87

SHRUBS
Deciduous/ Evergreen TALL (6-15'+) Deciduous D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D E E D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D Amelanchier laevis Amelancier canadensis Betula pumila Cephalanthus occidentalis Cornus alternifolia Cornus ammomum Cornus foemina Cornus rugosa Cornus stolonifera Corylus americana Hamamelis virginia Ilex verticillata Lindera benzoin Lonicera involucrata Physocarpus opulifolius Prunus americana Prunus virginiana Ptelea trifoliata Rhus aromatica Rhus copallina Rosa setigera Salix discolor Sambucus canadensis Sambucus racemosa Staphylea trifolia Vaccinium corymbosum Viburnum lentago Viburnum trilobum Zanthoxylum americanum Alnus rugosa Viburnum dentatum Viburnum prunifolium Viburnum opulus Juniperus communis** Kalmia angustifolium Aronia prunifolia Dirca palustris Potentilla fruticosa* Ribes cynosbati Rosa palustris Spirea alba Spirea tomentosa Viburnum acerifolium Viburnum rafinesquianum Amorpha canescens Cimicifuga racemosa Diervilla lonicera Ribes americanum Rosa carolina Rosa palustris Ceanothus americanus Spiraea alba Allegheny serviceberry Shadblow Birch, bog Buttonbush Dogwood, alternat-leaved Dogwood, silky Dogwood, gray Dogwood, roundleaf Dogwood, red-osier Hazlenut, American Witch-hazel Holly, Michigan Spicebush Black twinberry Ninebark Plum, American wild Chokecherry Hop-tree; wafer ash Sumac, fragrant Sumac, winged Rose, prairie Willow, pussy Elderberry, American Elder, redberried Bladdernut, american Blueberry, highbush Nannyberry Highbush cranberry Prickly-ash Speckled Alder Arrow Wood Black Haw Highbush Cranberry Juniper, ground Sheep laurel Chokeberry, purple Leatherwood Cinquefoil, shrubby Gooseberry, prickly Rose, swamp Meadowsweet Steeplebush Viburnum, mapleleaf Arrow-wood, downy Leadplant Black snakeroot Bush honeysuckle Wild Black Currant Carolina Rose Swamp Rose New Jersey Tea Meadowsweet 1 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 NA 2 NA 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 1 NA 2 3 3 NA 3 3 3 2 4 NA NA NA NA NA 1 2 2 1 2 3 NA 2 2 2 1 2 2 M D M M D D D M NA M NA D M M D D D M M D M M D M NA D D M NA D D D M D NA NA NA NA NA M D D M M D NA D D D M D D E E M R S/H R S/H O C O O O O M O O/R I M O M C O O O R O S I NA NA NA NA P R R R M O M M M O O NA NA E E E E Semi-E Semi-E 25-30' 15-20' 12-20' 6-15' 15-25' 3-9' 6-12' 3-9' 3-9' 8-10' 15-25' 6-12' 6-15' 6-10 5-10' 18-24' 12-30' 20' 6-10' 20-25' 6-12' 20-25' 5-12' 6-12' 12-18' 6-12' 15-18' 12' 9-15' 15' - 25' 3'-10' 12'-15' 6'-10' 3-6' 1-3' 3-6' 3-6' 3' 3-6' 4-5' 3-6' 2-4' 3-6' 3-6' 18" - 4' 5' - 6' 2' - 3' 3'-5' 3'-6' 3'-6' 3'-6' 2'-5' 15-25' 10-15' 12-20' 12-20' 30-40' 6-10' 6-12' 6-12' 10' 5-8' 15-25' 6-12' 6-12' 10' 6-10' 20-35' 18-25' 15-20' 12-20' 20-25' 12-20' 7-9' 6-12' 12-15' 6-12' 8-12' 15-18' NA 9-18' NA NA NA NA 8-12' 4-5' 3-6' 3-6' 3' 3-6' 4-6' 3-6' 3-6' 3-6' 3-6' 2-3' 3-4' 2-3' NA NA NA 6-12' NA S/L S/L L/C S/L/C L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L S/L/C S/L/C L L S/L NA L S/L L S/L S/L S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S//L L L L/C NA L NA NA NA NA S/L NA S/L/C L S/L L L S/L/C L L/C S/L S/L NA S/L S/L/C S/L L/C S/L S/L/C Botanical Name Common Name Air Quality benefits Canopy Density Plant Form Mature Height Mature Width Soil Type

MEDIUM (3'-6') Evergreens Deciduous

88

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Moisture Needs

Light Needs

Unit Size

Average Retail Cost

Other Comments

M/X M/X H/M H/M M H/M M/X M H/M M/X M/X H/M H/M H/M M M M/X M/X M/X M/X M/X H/M H/M H/M M/X H/M H/M H M M M M/X M M/X H/M/X M M H/M/X M/X H/M H/M H/M H/M/X M/X X M M/X M H/M H/M/X M/X H

F/P/S F/P/S F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F F P/S F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P/S F/P F P F/P F/P F F/P/S F/P F/P

5-6' B&B 5-6' B&B NA NA 5-6' B&B 5 Gal NA NA 5 Gal 5 Gal 7 Gal 2 Gal 3 Gal NA NA NA 8-10' B&B NA 5 Gal NA NA NA 3 Gal NA NA NA 5 Gal 3 Gal NA NA 5 Gal 7 Gal 2 Gal NA NA 1 gallon NA I gallon NA I gallon I gallon 1 gallon NA I gallon per quart NA NA I gallon NA I gallon 1gallon 1 gallon

$80 $80 NA NA $67 $16 NA NA $8 $20 $30 $13 $16 NA NA NA $90 NA $14 NA NA NA $15 NA NA NA $20 $19 NA NA $22 $32 $16 NA NA $10 NA $14 NA $14 $12 $14 NA $14 $6.50 NA NA $14 NA $14 $15 $12

Medium drought tolerance Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance Medium drought tolerance Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance High droight tolerance Wetland margins, low drought tolerance, Effective bank cover Medium drought tolerance Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance, need male and female plants to set bright red fruit that persists into the winter Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance, On Michigan's threatened species list High droight tolerance, good for erosion control No drought and salt tolerance Medium drought tolerance low salt tolerance Good bank/ground cover, high drought tolerance Medium drought tolerance High droight tolerance Low drought tolerance Medium drought tolerancevegetative parts of the plant are poisonous Low salt tolerace, vegetative parts of the plant are poisonous NA Low drought tolerance, needs acidic soil Low drought tolerance NA NA Soil Stabilizer, fixes nitrogen NA Medium drought tolerance Medium drought tolerance, good windbreak Drought Tolerant Good for shady edge, hardy grass for difficult areas Native wetland flora Good border plant, tolerant to soil NA NA Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance Low drought tolerance High drought tolerance Medium drought tolerance High drought tolerance,sensitive to disturbance, presence indicates that prairie has been uncultivated NA High drought tolerance High drought tolerance High drought tolerance Low drought tolerance High drought tolerance Low drought tolerance

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

89

HERBACEOUS
Deciduous/ Evergreen Tall (48-88"+) EVERGREENS E E DECIDUOUS D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D Agastache nepetoides Anaphalis margaritacea Aralia racemosa Asclepias incarnata Asclepias syriaca Aster macrophyllus Aster novae-angliae Baptista lactea Cacalia atriplicifolia Calla palustris Camassia scilloides Chelone glabra Claytonia virginica Clintonia borealis Cornus canadensis Dalea purpurea Dicentra canadensis Epilobium angustifolium Erigeron pulchellus Eupatorium maculatum Eupatorium perfoliatum Filipendula rubra Fragaria virginiana Heliopsis helianthoides Hepatica acutiloba Impatiens capensis Liatris spicata Lobelia cardinalis Lobelia siphilitica Lupinus perennis Monarda fistulosa Oenothera biennis Opuntia humifusa Polemonium reptans Ratibida pinnata Rudbeckia hirta Rudbeckia laciniata Sanguinaria canadensis Smilacina racemosa Stylophorum diphyllum Thalictrum dasycarpum Tiarella cordifolia Veronicastrum virginicum Viola pubescens Viola rostrata Yellow giant hyssop Pearly everlasting American spikenard Milkweed, swamp Milkweed, common Aster, big-leaved Aster, New England White wild indigo Pale Indian plantain Wild calla Wild hyacinth Turtlehead Spring beauty Bluebead lily Bunchberry Purple prairie clover Squirrel-corn Fireweed Robin's plantain Joe-pye weed Boneset Queen-of-the-prairie Strawberry, wild Oxeye Hepatica, sharp-lobed Jewelweed Marsh blazing star Lobelia, red Lobelia, great blue Lupine Bee balm Evening-primrose Eastern prickly pear Spreading Jacob's ladder Coneflower, yellow Black-eyed Susan Coneflower, cut-leaved Bloodroot, Canadian Burnet Solomon-seal, false Celandine poppy Meadow-rue, purple Foamflower Culver's-root Violet, downy yellow Violet, long-spurred 48" - 72" 48" - 72" 48" - 72" 48" - 60" 36" - 72" 24" - 48" 12" - 72" 24" - 72" 36" - 60" 36" - 60" 60" - 120" 12" - 72" 24" - 48" 36" - 84" 12" - 48" 48" - 96" 48" - 72" 24" - 48" 36" - 72" 24" - 72" 18" - 60" 36" - 72" 48" - 72" 84" 48" - 72" 24" - 72" 36" - 60" 36" - 48" 24" - 60" 24" - 48" 24" - 48" 24" - 48" 24" - 60" 24" - 48" 78" 36" - 72" 12" - 40" 36" - 96" 60" 24" - 48" 30" - 60" 12" - 24" 48" - 72" 12" - 18" 12" - 24" 12" - 18" 18" - 24" 36" - 60" 24" - 36" 8" - 12" 24" - 48" 24" 36" 24" - 36" 24" - 48" 12" -24" 12" -24" 12" - 36" 6" - 12" NA 120"+ 12" - 24" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 24" - 48" 36" - 48" 36" - 48" 12" - 24" 24" 48" 12" - 24" 18" - 36" 12" - 18" 12" - 24" 12" - 24" 12" - 24" 24" - 36" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 18" - 24" 12" - 24" 18" - 36" 6" - 12" 24" - 36" 6" - 12" 30" - 60" 12" - 24" 24" - 48" 12"-18" 6" -12" L S S S/L S/L L L L/C S/L S L L L/C NA S/L S S/L S/L S/L L L L L S/L L L L/C L L S/L L/C S/L S S/L L/C L/C L L/C L L L L L/C L L M X M H/M M/X M H/M M/X M/X H H/M H/M M M M M/X M M/X M H/M H/M M M/X M M H/M H/M H/M H/M X M/X M/X X M M/X M/X H/M M M M M M M M M F/P F F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P F F/P F/P P/S P/S P F P F P F/P F/P F/P F/P F/P P/S P F F/P F/P F F F F F/P F F/P F/P P/S P/S P/S F P F/P P/S P/S Boltonia asteroides var. recognita Sisyrinchium angustifolium Boltonia, false aster Blue-eyed-grass 12" - 48" 48" - 96" 24" - 48" 6" - 12" L L H/M/X M/X F F/P Botanical Name Common Name Mature Height Mature Width Soil Type Moisture Needs Light Needs

Medium (15-40")
EVERGREENS E E DECIDUOUS D D D D D D D D D D Acorus americanus Actaea pachypoda Actaea rubra Anemone canadensis Angelica atropurpurea Anternnaria parlinii Aquilegia canadensis Arisaema triphyllum Asclepias tuberosa Aster laevis Sweet flag Baneberry, white Baneberry, red Anemone, Canada Angelica Smooth pussytoes Columbine, wild Jack-in-the-pulpit Milkweed, butterfly Aster, smooth 36" 18" - 30" 18" - 30" 12" - 30" 24" - 36" 12" - 36" 12" - 36" 18" - 36" 12" - 36" 12" - 36" 36" 24" - 36" NA 24" - 36" 24" - 72" NA 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" - 24" NA L L/C L/C L NA L L/C S/L L/C M M M M M X M/X M M/X M/X F/P P/S P/S F/P F/P F/P P/S P/S F F/P Anemone virginiana Dodecatheon meadia Thimbleweed Shooting star 12" - 24" 12" - 24" 12" - 24" 6" - 12" S/L/C S/L M/X M F/P F/P

90

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Plant Form

Maintenance

Other Comments

Erect/Mounding Erect/Mounding Erect Mounding Erect Erect Erect Erect/Mounding Erect/Mounding Erect Erect/Mounding Prostrate/ Spreading Erect Erect Erect/Mounding Erect Prostrate/Spreading Mounding Erect Mounding Erect Mounding Erect Erect Prostrate/Spreading Erect Erect/Mounding Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Prostrate/Spreading Mounding Erect Erect Prostrate Erect Mounding Erect/Mounding Prostrate/ Spreading Mounding Erect/Mounding Mounding Erect

Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low High NA Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Medium Low Medium Medium Medium High Medium Low Low Low Low

Edible fruit; ground cover; prefers well-drained soil Tolerates alkaline; drought-tolerant Prostrate spreading evergreen ground cover Long thick bean pods offer fall and winter interest Cut flowers; biennial Cut flowers; drought-tolerant; nectar and seed source; replacement for invasive Purple Loosestrife Pretty purple fruit; attractive foliage; prefers moist woodland soil Flowers have no petals; stamens are showy; need male and female flowers to set seed Intersting leaves Dies back by June; poisonous Host plant for Fritillary butterflies Can spread by runners to form dense stands. Threatened in MI, Good Cut flowers, Leaf surfaces bend to sunlight in Morning and Afternoon-Basal leaves hold edges pointing N-S Tolerates occasional flooding Attractive leaves; unusual flowers; good groundcover Good groundcover Interesting leaves; prefers less acid soils Good for road side planting, Fixes nitrogen , good for prairie restoration Hummingbird and Butterfly Attractor Very aggressive, flowers early, produces red fruits, may go dormant if soil dries out Salt Tolerant, Host for Silvery Checkerspot; spreads aggressively Grown primarily for foliage, semi-evergreen, retains color in through fall/winter NA Prefers wet soils, tolerates flodded condition Dune restoration Extensive root system resents disturbance Interesting leaves; aggressive Use it as a spring native plant or in the naturalistic garden. A hummingbird plant Decorative seedhead; cut flowers Wild prairies, open woods, wet meadows and mosit soil along ponds and stream banks Prefers mildly acidic soil conditions Tolerates occasional flooding Flowers are aster-like, spreads by runners Drought tolerant, Red berries; also called doll's eyes; berries and rootstock are poisonous to humans Prefers stable water level; poisonous roots Interesting leaves Tolerates hot dry site and if given full sun can tolerate moist soil Attractive, somewhat vigorous native wild flower Hummingbird plant; accent; tolerates occasional flooding; juice is poisonous Fragrant; tolerates occasional flooding Wooly stems, plants spread by runners Does well in wood, ravines moist stream banks meadows and Prairies May need to be staked or pinched back when it gets tall Stems are often a deep purple color, seedheads are decorative in winter Good for wetland restoration, Crushed leaves give off cinnamon aroma, spreads by rhizomes Pink flower looks like cotton candy, rhizomes spread far, will not do well in hot conditions

Erect Erect Prostrate Mounding Spreading Erect Erect NA Conical Erect Erect Conical/ Rounding

Medium Medium NA Low NA Low Low NA Medium Medium Low Low

Excellent rock garden perennial Very unusual flower; attractive fern-like leaves; entire plant dies back in June; roots are toxic Good for marshes, swales and edges of quite water Berries and roots are poisonous, good for cool shaded woods and thickets Berries and roots are poisonous, good for cool shaded woods and thickets, needs to be shelterted Intersting leaves orient North to South; tolerates occasional flooding; deep tap roots make transplanting difficult Tolerates occasional flooding; shade-tolerant Food source for many wildlife species; flood-tolerant; may need staking Deep blue flowers which never open Interesting evergreen leaves Interesting green or red berries with dark bands; grows well in sandy soil and full sun Soil acidic to neutral, flowers open in sun

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

91

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

Coreopsis lanceolata Desmodium canadense Ecinacea purpurea Eryngium yuccifolium Euphorbia corollata Galium boreale Gentiana andrewsii Geranium maculatum Hydrastis canadensis Iris versicolor Iris virginica Isopyrum biternatum Liatris cylindracea Lilium michiganense Lysimachia ciliata Maianthemum canadense Mertensia virginica Mitchella repens Mitella diphylla Penstemon hirsutus Physostegia virginiana Podophyllum peltatum Porteranthus trifoliatus Potentilla anserina Pteridium aquilinum Rudbeckia fulgida Ruellia humilis Sarracenia purpurea Senecio aureus Silphium laciniatum Solidago caesia Solidago rigidia Solidago speciosa Tradescantia ohioensis Uvularia grandiflora Veronia missurica

Sand coreopsis, tickseeed Canada tick trefoil Purple coneflower Rattlesnake master Flowering spurge Northern bedstraw Bottle gentian Geranium, wild Goldenseal Wild blue flag, northern blue flag Iris, southern blue flag Rue-anemone, false Blazing star, dwarf Michigan lily Fringed loosestrife Canada mayflower Virginia bluebells Partridgeberry Mitrewort; Bishop's cap Beard-tongue, hairy False dragonhead Mayapple Bowman's root Silverweed Bracken Black-eyed Susan, orange conef Wild petunia Common pitcher plant Golden ragwort Compass plant Goldenrod, bluestem Goldenrod, stiff Goldenrod, showy Spiderwort Bellwort Ironweed

12" - 36" 12" - 24" 18" - 30" 24" - 36" 20" - 36" 24" - 36" 24" - 36" 12" - 24" 12" - 24" 12" - 24" 24" - 36" 24" - 36" 6" - 12" 24" - 36" 18" - 24" 12" - 36" 12" - 30" 24" - 36" 6" 12" - 36" 18" - 30" 12" - 36" 12" - 30" 18" - 24" 12" - 36" 36" 24" - 36" 12" - 36" 12" - 24" 12" - 36" 12" - 36" 24" - 36" 18" - 24" 24" - 36" 18" - 30" 24" - 36" 18" - 30"

12" - 18" NA NA NA 24" -36" NA 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" -18" 6" - 12" 24" - 36" 18" - 24" 6" 6" - 12" 12" - 24" NA NA 18" - 24" 6" - 12" 8" - 12" 18" - 24" 24" -36" 6" - 12" 18" - 36" 12" - 36" 36" 24" - 36" 18" - 24" 12" - 24" NA 18" - 36" 18" - 36" NA 24" - 36" NA 12" - 18" NA

S/L NA L/C NA S Clay S/L L L L Clay L L L L/C ? S/L L S L L L/C L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C L/C S/L S/L S/L S/L S/L/C L/C S/L L/C L L/C

Mesic/Xeric M M/X M/X M X M/X M M/X M H H/M M M/X H/M M M M M/X M M/X M M H/M H M M/X X H H/M M M/X M/X M/X M M H/M

F/P P F/P F/P F F/P P F/P P/S P/S F/P F/P P/S F/P F P/S P/S P/S P/S F/P F F/P P/S P P/S P/S F/P/S S F F F P F F/P F/P P/S F

Cypripedium calceoulus var. pubescenLarge yellow lady's slipper

Small (3-18")
EVERGREENS E E DECIDUOUS D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D Allium cernuum Allium tricoccum Anemone quinquefolia Anemonella thalictroides Asarum canadense Astragalus canadensis Caltha palustris Campanula rotundifolia Cassia hebecarpa Caulophyllum thalictroides Corydalis sempervirens Dentaria laciniata Dicentra cucullaria Equisetum hyemale Erythronium americanum Eupatorium purpureum Geum triflorum Goodyera pubescens Helianthus strumosus Hepatica americana Heuchera americana Hypericum ascyron Jeffersonia diphylla Koeleria macrantha Lespedeza capitata Onion, nodding wild Leek, wild Anemone, wood Rue-anemone Ginger, wild Canada milk vetch Marsh marigold Harebell, bluebell Wild senna Blue cohosh Pink corydalis Toothwort, cut-leaved Dutchman's breeches Tall scouring rush Trout-lily, yellow Joe-pye weed Prairie smoke Downy rattlesnake plantain Sunflower, rough Hepatica, round-lobed Alumroot, coral bells Giant St. John's wort Twinleaf June grass Round-headed bush clover 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 6" 6" 10" 3" - 16" 12" - 18" 12" 12" - 16" 6" - 18" 6" - 15" 6" - 8" 6" - 8" 10" - 12" 6" - 8" 36" - 48" 6" - 18" NA NA 6" 12" -18" 15" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 6" - 12" NA NA 6" 12" -18" NA 12" -18" NA NA 6" -12" NA NA 6" -12" 12" -72" 6" - 8" 24" - 48" 6" - 12" NA NA 6" 12" -18" NA 6" -12" 12" - 18" 6" - 12" L/C L L L L NA L S L/C L S L L S/L S/L L S/L/C S/L L/C S/L L S/L/C S/L S/L S/L H/M M/X M M X M M H/M M M/X M M/X M/X M/X M M M X M/X M/X M M M/X M/X F/P P P/S P/S P/S F/P F/P F NA P/S P P/S P/S P P/S F/P P F/P F P/S P/S F/P P/S F/P F Hydrophyllum virginianum Pycnanthemum virginianum Virginia waterleaf Mountain mint 6" - 8" 6" NA 12" -18" L L/C M H/M P/S F/P

92

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Erect NA NA NA Mounding NA Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Conical Mounding NA NA Mounding Mounding NA NA Erect Mounding Erect NA NA Erect/Mounding Erect Erect NA Erect Erect NA Erect Rounded Mounding NA

Medium NA NA NA Low NA Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low NA NA Medium Low NA NA Medium Medium Low NA NA Low Medium High NA Low Low NA Medium NA Low NA

Dies back by June Prefers cool sites Dies back by June; host for West Virginia White Dies back by June, also called adder's tongue Interesting leaves; red sap in roots and stems; root is poisionous Wetland Indicator States: OLB ,sp. Heterophylla is Threatened in MI, Carnivorous NA Edible flowers with mild onion flavor; cuttings; papery dried seedheads in autumn; leaves are grass-like, won't compete will with native grasses Edible; strong onion odor Intersting seedpod; drought-tolerant; host for Monarch Cut and fragrant flowers; a hummingbird plant; good groundcover; similar invasive species include Hesperis matronalis (Dame's Rocket) and Phlox paniculata Plants go dormant in summers NA looks a bit like snapdragons Emergent aquatic plant, conspicuous blue flower spike Stoloniferous - can become invasive in some situations Stems have purplish tint in Spring, midnight-blue berry-like fruit borne in a cluster follows flowers Common plant in restoration projects in a variety of microclimates. It may be an initial on-site colonizer Very large leaves, leafs out early, spreads vigorously, Can use after invasive removal to re-establish natives Showy flower; tolerates occasional flooding Reseeding biennial Unbranched, jointed stems, can be invasive Grows best when the rhizome is just covered with water, muskrats are fond of roots Cut, dried and fragrant flowers Prefers well drained, moist soils Bluish stem; beautiful fall flowers Seedheads are attractive in winter Heart-shaped leaves; cut flowers Fragrant when crushed; also called wild bergamont Dies back in late May Has the look of "sturdy" baby's breath, bleed milky sap (latex) when picked or injured, tends to be aggressive Likes alkaline soils; flower spikes 2-12"; may need staking Deep purple berries in late summer Hummingbird plant; fast grower; interesting "exploding" seeds leaves close in evening, brownish red persists through the winter Cut flower; fragrant when crushed; may need staking Grows a year or two after fire, forming a ground cover, can be aggressive in a landscape situation

NA Erect/Mounding Spreading Prostrate/ Conical Conical Spreading Conical NA Mounding NA NA Erect NA NA Erect Erect Erect Erect Erect Conical NA Erect Erect NA Erect Erect/Mounding Erect

NA Low Low NA NA Medium Low NA Low NA NA Medium NA NA Medium Medium Medium Low Low NA NA Low Low NA Low Low Low

Tends to spread; tolerates occasional flooding Individual flowers last one day Lleaves Pr underneath Stems are modified fleshy pads Threatened in MI. Requires acidic soil, can spread from rhizomes, can't crowd with other plants Upright perennial with blue, purple, or lavender flowers Purple stems Fruit is bright scarlet; tolerates occasional flooding Cluster of bright orange-red berries appear in summer, forms extensive colonies, requires acidic soil NA NA Interesting mottled leaves; prefers acid soils; can be poisionous if eaten in large quantities White to pink flowers have strongly reflexed petals wit ha yellow and red cone-like center giving the appearance of shooting stars, foliage has redish tint The heavy plant may need to be held up with stakes if it begins to droop. Ants help propogate the plants May rebloom in fall; host for Fritillary butterflies Attractive fall color, leaves and fruit Interesting leaves; evergreen Prefers deep, rich organic soils, leaves are poisonous Stalk with basel leaves. Ephemeral leaves die back by summer but return in fall and remain green through winter NA Decorative seedhead; drought-tolerant Drought tolerant; hummingbird plant; host of Karner Blue butterfly Cut flower; excellent hummingbird plant; reseeds readily Drought tolerant; prefers well-drained soils Tolerates occasional flooding; poisoinous when eaten

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

93

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D SMALL SHRUBS SMALL (>2'-3') EVERGREENS E DECIDUOUS D D D D D D D D

Mimulus ringens Nymphaea odorata Oenothera fruticosa Phlox divaricata Polygonatum biflorum Pontederia cordata Sagittaria latifolia Scutellaria lateriflora Silene virginica Silphium terebinthinaceum Smilacina stellata Thalictrum diocium Trillium grandiflorum Verbena hastata Zizia aurea

Monkey flower American white water lily Sundrops Phlox, woodland Solomon-seal Pickerelweed Broad-leaved arrowhead Mad-dog scullcap Fire pink Prairie-dock Solomon-seal, starry false Meadow-rue, early Large-flowered trillium Vervain, blue Golden Alexanders

!2" - 18" 18" 6" - 12" 8" - 12" 12" - 18" 12" - 18" 12" -18" 8" - 24" 18" 10" - 20" 6" - 18" 16" 8" - 10" 12" - 18" 18"

6" -12" NA 6" - 12" 12" - 18" 12" -18" 12" - 18" 12" -36" 4" - 10" 18" 12" -36" NA 18" NA 12" - 24" 18" - 24"

L/C NA S/L L L S/L/C L/C S/L/C L L/C S/L L/C NA L/C L/C

H/M H X M/X H/M M H M M/X M M M/X M H/M H/M

F/P F F P P/S P/S P/S P/S F/P F F/P P/S Shade F F/P

Have been included with Herbaceous Plants since they share the similar mature heights and forms

Juniperus horizontalis Euonymus obvata Hypericum prolificum Kalmia polifolia Rosa carolina Vaccinium angustifolium Vaccinium macrocarpon Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Epigaea repens

Creeping Juniper Strawberry-bush, running St. John's-wort, shrubby Bog laurel Rose, Carolina Blueberry, low sweet Cranberry, large Bearberry Trailing arbutus

1'-2' 1-2' 3' 1' 3' 1-2' 1' 6" - 12" NA

NA 3' 3-6' 4-8" 6-12' 2' 3' NA NA

NA S/L S/L/C P S/L/C S/L L/C S S

M M H/M M M M/X H X NA

F F/P/S F/P F F/P F/P F/P F/P NA

94

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Erect NA Erect Erect Erect Irregular/ Spreading Erect NA Erect Erect NA NA NA Erect Erect

Low NA Low Medium Low Medium Medium NA Medium Low NA NA NA Low Medium

NA Bristly fruits, Deer and Mammal Resistant White berries; also called doll's eyes; berries and rootstock are poisionous Flowers can be cut and dried First native grass to green up in spring and has showy greenish white flowers (f) Can be used for dune restoration or groundcover (f). NA Tolerates poor soils; prefers well-drained; (obedient plant) Flowers can be cut and dried Somewhat aggressive, a member of the legume family and improves the soil by adding nitrogen Likes a deep, rich soil, add lots of organic matter before planting, Can be used in low areas in perennial borders or along ponds and streams Largest flowers in genus, 2-3" Gray or brown seed pods rattle in the wind when they are ripe Food source for many butterflies; likes sandy soil; spreads rapidly Tolerates occasional flooding; can be aggressive Purple stems; flowers have no petals

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Low drought tolerance Good ground cover NA Low drought tolerance NA Medium drought tolerance, needs acidic soil Mat forming High droght tolerance, does best in acidic soil Needs acidic soil, can be difficult to grow

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

95

GRASSES
Deciduous/ Evergreen Tall (4' - 6'+) EVERGREENS E DECIDUOUS D D D D D D D D D D Medium (2'-4') EVERGREENS E E DECIDUOUS D D D D D D D D D D D D Ammophila breviligulata Bromus latiglumis Carex crinita Carex gracillima Carex muskingumensis Carex stricta Juncus effusus Schizachyrium scoparium Bouteloua curtipendula Chasmanthium latifolium Deschampsia caespitosa Juncus torreyi Beach grass Grass, ear-leaved brome Sedge, fringed Sedge, graceful Sedge, palm Sedge, tussock Rush, soft-stemmed Little bluestem Side-oats grama Wild oats Tufted hair grass Rush, Torrey's Schizachyrium scoparium Elymus virginicus Bluestem, little Wild-rye, Virginia Andropogon gerardii Elymus canadensis Hystrix patula Panicum virgatum Scirpus acutus Scirpus cyperinus Sorghastrum nutans Spartina pectinata Calamagrotis canadensis Eriophorum virginicum Bluestem, big Wild-rye, Canada Bottlebrush grass Switch grass Hardstem bulrush Wool-grass Indian grass Prairie cordgrass Blue joint Cotton grass, tawny Scirpus atrovirens Bulrush, green EVERGREENS Botanical Name Common Name

Porosity (during summer)

Plant Form

Mature Height

Soil Type

Moisture Needs

Light Needs

M

erect; bunch

3-5'

L/C

H/M

F

D D N/A N/A D M D D M M

erect; bunch erect; bunch upright upright erect; rhizomatous erect; bunch erect; bunch erect; rhizomatous erect; rhizomatous Single crown; erect

6-9' 3-5' 3-4' 4-6' 5-8' 4-6' 4-7' 3-6' 2-5' 3-4'

L/C L L/C S/L/C L L S/L/C S/L L/C S/L/C

M/X M/X H/M M/X H H M/X H/M H/M M/X

F F/P P/S F/P F F F/P F F F

D M

NA erect

2-4' 2-4'

S/L/C S/L/C

M/X M

F F/P/S

D

erect; rhizomatous NA

2-3' 3-4' 2-3' 2-3' 2-3' 2-4' 2-4' 2-3' 2-3' 2-3' 2-3 1/2' 3'

S L/C L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L/C S/L

M/X H/M H M/X H H H X M/X M M/X H/M

F F/P/S F/P/S P/S P/S F/P F/P F F F/P F/P F

P M M N/A N/A N/A D P P P

erect; bunch semi-erect erect; bunch horizontal rhizome NA NA erect; rhizomatous erect; rhizomatous erect; bunch erect; rhizomatous

Small (1' - 2') D D D D D D D D D D D D D Brachyelytrum erectum Carex grayi Carex pensylvanica Carex sprengelii Carex stipata Carex vulpinoidea Elymus villosus Eragrostis spectabilis Glyceria striata Hierochloe odorata* Juncus tenuis Luzula acuminata Koeleria macrantha Grass, long-awned wood Sedge, Gray's Sedge, Pennsylvania Sedge, long-beaked Sedge, awl-fruited Sedge, fox Wild-rye, silky Purple lovegrass Grass, fowl-manna Sweet grass Rush, path Hairy wood rush Junegrass, prairie N/A M N/A N/A M P N/A P M P N/A N/A P NA erect; bunch NA NA erect; bunch erect; bunch NA erect; rhizomatous semi-erect; rhizomatou Conical; semi-erect N/A Irregular erect; bunch 1-2' 1-2' 8" 1-2' 1-3' 1-3' 1-3' 1-1.5' 1-3' 1-2' 8-18" 6-10" 1-2' S/L/C L/C S/L L/C L/C L/C S/L/C S/L L/C S/L S/L/C L/C S/L M/X H/M M/X H/M H H M X H/M H/M H/M/X M H P/S P/S F/P P/S F/P F/P P/S F F/P/S S F/P F/P P/S

96

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Other Comments

Good for lowlands/ditches

Erosion control; drought-tolerant Soft nodding seedhead; will spread by seed Interesting "bottlebrush" seedhead Erosion control; tolerant of alkaline soils,use sparingly as it self-sows and can overtake less vogorous plants Plant in masses in wet areas Long wooly hairs on seeds; arching seedhead Erosion control; drought-tolerant Effective streambank stabalization; "toothbrush" seedhead Makes a solid stand that excludes other plants, flood tolerant Low drought tolerance, medium moisture use

PH 7 or higher; Erosion control: Because of its growth habit and adaptability to a wide range of soil conditions, little bluestem is useful as a component of revegetation mixes Can be drilled at 10 pounds per acre; considered successful if 1-2 two plants are present per square foot; slow growth rate

Rhizomes can spread up to 8 ft in a year, a fast growing dune grass Robust grass; large nodding seedhead, Growth habit-graminoid Attractive drooping seedhead Graceful arching aspect Tuft of leaves at tip of stem; very leafy Emerging blue-green leaves; forms mounds, winter hardy Clumps of bright green leafless stems, native prairie grass Recognized by its roundish clumps of stems , will not grow in poorly drained soil, can be drought tolerant (deep roots) Flowers are arranged on one side of the stem, Threatened species in Michigan Showy dangling seedhead starts out green and becomes coppery brown, self-sowing Prefers cool sites, moderate growth rate Grows in low wet places, robust plant which often grows near railroads

Slender seedhead; broad leaves Distinctive mace-like seedhead Tolerates dry soils; spreads in sand Bright yellowish-green foliage; nodding seedhead, prefers cool (not hotter than 6a) Spiky seedhead "Foxtail" seedhead Soft velvety leaves; nodding seedheads A purplish flowerhead; drought-tolerant Wispy narrow leaved grass, low drought tolerance, medium moisture use Highly aromatic, flowers early, low drought tolerance, low moisture use Short; tolerant of soil compaction Good for pond edges, shallow water and bogs High drought tolerance; high moisture use, best use in areas where weeds are well controlled

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

97

Canopy"Density"!"

Dense Moderate Porous Columnar Oval Rounded Irregular mounded Spreading Pyramidal Horizontal Sand Loam Clay Hydric Mesic Xeric Full"Sun Partial"Sun Shade * **

D M P C O R I M S P H S L C H M X F P S

Air"Quality"Information

1 Average 2 Good 3 Excellent

Fine"leaf"texture"or"medium"canopy"density"or"deciduous Medium"leaf"texture"or"medium"canopy"density"vs"dense"porosity"or"deciduous Coarse"leaf"texture"or"dense"canopy"density"or"evergreens

Plant"Form

Only"Trees"and"Tall"shrubs"are"evaluated"for"Direct"Air"quality"benefits ¥ High"VOC"emitting"trees

Soil"Type

Moisture"Needs

Light"Needs

Non!Natives Pollen"Producers

98

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Appendix C: Invasive Species
Trees Scientific Name Acer ginnala Acer platanoides Ailanthus altissima Alnus glutinosa Elaeagnus umbellata Morus alba Populus alba Robinia pseudoacacia Ulmus pumila Common Name Amur maple Norway Maple Tree of Heaven Black alder Autumn Olive White Mulberry White poplar Black Locust Siberian Elm

Shrubs Scientific Name Berberis thunbergii Celastrus orbiculata Hypericum perforatum Ligustrum vulgare Lonicera japonica Lonicera maackii Lonicera morrowii Lonicera tatarica Lonicera xbella Lonicera xylosteum Rhamnus cathartica Rhamnus frangula Rhodotypos scandens Rosa multiflora Common Name Japanese Barberry Oriental Bittersweet Common St. Johnswort Privet Japanese Honeysuckle Amur Honeysuckle Morrow Honeysuckle Tartarian Honeysuckle Asian Honeysuckle European Fly Honeysuckle European (Common) Buckthorn Glossy Buckthorn Black Jetbead Multiflora Rose

Grasses Scientific Name Bromus inermis Festuca arundinacea Microstegium viminium Phalaris arundinacea Poa compressa Poa pratensis Common Name Smooth Brome Grass Tall Fescue Japanese Stilt Grass Reed Canary Grass Canada Bluegrass Kentucky Bluegrass

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

99

Herbaceous Plants Scientific Name Aegopodium podagraria Alliaria petiolata Butomus umbellatus Cardamine impatiens Centaurea maculosa Cirsium arvense Cirsium palustre Convallaria majalis Convolvulus arvensis Coronilla varia Cynanchum louiseae Cynanchum rossicum Dipsacus laciniatus Dipsacus sylestris Eichhornia crassipes Euphorbia esula Glechoma hederacea Gypsophila spp. Hemerocallis fulva Heracleum mantegazzianum Hesperis matronalis Humulus japonicus Hydrocharis morsus-ranae Iris pseudacorus Lotus corniculata Lysimachia nummularia Lythrum salicaria Melilotus alba Melilotus officinalis Myriophyllum spicatum Pastinaca sativa Polygonum australis Polygonum cuspidatum Polygonum perfoliatum Pueraria montana var. lobata Saponaria officinalis Silene vulgaris Torilis arvensis Typha angustifolia Typha x glauca Vinca minor Vincetoxicum spp. Common Name Goutweed Garlic Mustard Flowering-rush Bitter Cress Spotted Knapweed Canada Thistle European Marsh Thistle Lily of the Valley Field Bindweed Crown Vetch Black swallow-wort Pale swallow-wort Cut-Leaved Teasel Teasel Water-hyacinth Leafy Spurge Ground Ivy Baby's Breath Orange day-lily Giant hogweed Dame's Rocket Japanese hops European frog-bit Yellow flag iris Birdfoot Trefoil Moneywort Purple Loosestrife White Sweet Clover Yellow Sweet Clover Eurasian Water Milfoil Wild Parsnip Giant reed Japanese Knotweed Mile-a-minute weed Kudzu Bouncingbet (soapwort) Bladder campion Hedge parsley Narrow-Leaved Cattail Hybrid cat-tail (T. ang x T. lat) Periwinkle Swallow-worts

100

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Appendix D: Stormwater Research
Stormwater Pollution This section summarizes the causes, harms, mitigation techniques, and preventative measures for urban stormwater pollution focusing on bioengineering. Bioengineering is an innovative technique for pollution prevention and mitigation that functionally replicates pre-development conditions. We will focus on four methods of vegetative mitigation: buffer strips, vegetated swales, bio-retention, and greenroofs. What is Stormwater Pollution? Stormwater pollution is generally referred to as nonpoint source (NPS) pollution by federal agencies. NPS pollution is considered the nation’s leading cause of water quality problems and occurs when gathered rainfall flowing across a landscape picks up materials and deposits them elsewhere.1 This process takes place during a storm event, which is the meteorological occurrence of water falling from the atmosphere to the earth and is measured by duration and intensity of the precipitation.2 Types of pollutants commonly transported in stormwater runoff are placed into three categories: sediments, toxic compounds/heavy metals, and organic compounds/nutrients.3 According to the U.S. EPA, the most common pollutants found in urban runoff are sediments and nutrients.4 Pollutants found in stormwater originate from a variety of places including construction sites, roadways, and combined sewer systems. NPS pollution causes a myriad of problems relating to infrastructure, human health, and surrounding ecosystems. Many materials transported in urban stormwater runoff include oil and toxic chemicals from automobiles, nutrients, viruses, bacteria, road salts and heavy metals. The presence of these pollutants causes beach closures, habitat destruction, contamination of drinking water, and endangers human health.5 The build-up of sediment in stormwater treatment and holding facilities is costly to dredge and usually necessitates eventual infrastructure replacement.6 Sedimentation, quantified as total suspended solids, is the leading cause of infrastructure degradation and in great amounts can cause watercourse modification downstream.7 There are numerous human and ecological health issues related to toxins and heavy metals, including zinc, copper, and lead contamination of potable water sources. Marine habitats are affected by the overabundance of nutrients. Nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen/nitrates spike bacteria levels that consume oxygen and effectively kill most of the organic matter in the water body.8 The high temperatures of stormwater runoff also negatively affect natural systems, causing a wide range of effects, but generally resulting in loss of organic matter including plant and aquatic life.9

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

101

Atmospheric deposition contributes considerably to the pollutant load found in urban stormwater runoff. Total atmospheric deposition for a site is a combined measure of dry and wet deposition as well as snowmelt. Dry deposition is the turbulent and gravitational transfer of pollutants from the air to the ground without the aid of any precipitation, while wet deposition occurs during a storm event and the transfer is aided by precipitation.10 Pollution is deposited after snowmelt from the collection of pollutants on the snow from both wet and dry deposition while frozen. The following table describes the amount of pollution found in stormwater that is derived from atmospheric deposition.

Levels of pollutants vary depending upon the ambient environment. For instance, highly industrial areas will produce more atmospheric pollutants than suburban residential neighborhoods due to the amount and intensity of polluting activities. Similarly, the amount of pollution attributed to fugitive dust depends on the levels present in the area of concern. Areas seeking to mitigate stormwater pollution should study the amount and source of constituents to determine the most applicable technique for removal and prevention. First flush describes the peak in NPS pollution that occurs during the initial stage of any rain storm. The increase in pollution results from the accumulation of oils, solids, and other pollutants on impervious surfaces between storm events.12 No matter the size or length of the storm, the first flush always contains a larger constituent load than the remainder of the storm.13 A study done in Maryland shows that the first 1.25 cm of runoff from a 2-year storm contains approximately 85% of the total pollutant load for the entire storm.14 Using bioengineering is an excellent way to capture runoff because it can be done on a site-by-site need basis. As a result, the total volume of water handled by each individual treatment system is small and manageable. Vegetative Means for Mitigation Issues with stormwater arise from conventional development practices, which result in increased volumes, speeds, and temperatures of runoff. The life cycle of stormwater runoff ends with either infiltration (or integration into a greater water body) or evapo-transpiration. Runoff is characterized by
102 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

five ways in which it travels to its final destination; i. Canopy Interception: water is intercepted by tree foli age and transported into its vascular tissues. ii. Surface Runoff: overland flow of water. Also referred to as sheet flow for flat areas and channel flow for collected waters flowing in depreciations in the topography. iii. Interflow: water flows in the upper levels of soil matter. iv. Baseflow: water flows in lower sub-soils; can be referred to as groundwater. v. Evapo-transpiration: evaporated water returns to the atmo sphere.15 Current practices in urban and suburban development increase surface runoff by removing existing vegetation and expanding the area of impervious surfaces. These changes reduce interflow, baseflow, and the rate of evapotranspiration due to increased volume and speed of surface runoff.16 This increases the levels of pollutants traveling in stormwater. Restoring or avoiding removal of vegetation and reducing impervious surfaces will help solve the challenges posed by increased runoff. Bioengineering solutions attempt to slow down over land water flows, increase infiltration and evapo-transpiration, decrease temperatures of stormwater, and filter pollutants. Technical Solutions A wide variety of vegetative mitigation techniques exist and this section describes which techniques are best for handling specific needs in stormwater pollution treatment and prevention. Each technique is described by its general characteristics and its overall performance during storm events. The focus of this section is on difficulties in initial design and installation, needs for ongoing maintenance, and the ability to improve stormwater quality. These methods are intended to be used in combination with one another to address site-specific pollution needs as each has strengths and weaknesses. Buffer Strips Buffer strips are characterized by vegetation planted across the path of stormwater.17 Vegetation typically consists of grasses and herbaceous or woody vegetation, but can include small trees. Trees often are not included in this method due to the limited amount of area for planting. However, some studies define buffer strips at a variety of widths, so a wide range of plantings must be considered.18 Buffer strips are commonly found in parking lots, near the edges of built structures, and along sidewalks or walking paths. They are generally used to separate either two areas of impervious surface or an area of impervious surface from a large turf lawn. The purpose of installing buffer strips is to reduce the velocity of sheet flow and increase the probability of infiltration.
University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program 103

Performance of vegetated strips is directly related to the depth and rate of flow of stormwater the strip must handle.19 Factors affecting performance include the vertical depth and shape of the buffer, the slope of the runoff area discharging into the buffer, and the density of the vegetation.20 If the strip is large enough for infiltration then the underlying soil type can also affect its performance. Maintenance of buffer strips varies greatly depending upon the density of plant material used and can vary from weekly to yearly needs. Buffer strips are a good pretreatment method and should be combined with other techniques to successfully treat stormwater.

Gravel Undisturbed Soil

Vegetated Swales Vegetated swales are depressions in the landscape that collect sheet flow, direct runoff, treat stormwater, and direct discharge to a specific point.21 If left unplanted, swales collect sheet flow and transform it to channel flow at the low point of the swale. Lack of vegetation greatly increases runoff velocity, reduces infiltration rates, and stimulates the transportation of pollutants. Swales are designed either to collect sheet flow from their sloping sides or to function as a channel with a designated inlet and outlet that directs water from impervious surfaces through the channel for treatment. The filtration rate for vegetated swales is affected by the length, depth, slope, ratio of area of the site to size of the swale, and density of vegetation. The length, depth, and slope are all interrelated to the rate of flow in the swale.22 A longer, deeper swale with a small slope will perform better than the inverse because of the amount of time that water spends in the system. Studies show that the overall length of the swale is the most determinant factor in the filtration rate.23 If a swale is small in proportion to the total area of a site it will become overloaded with runoff and cease to function properly. Vegetation in a swale must be carefully chosen. A high density of plants reduces the amount of space available for stormwater, which will
104 Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

greatly decrease the swale’s ability to function. Check dams placed along the low point of the swale allow for the pooling of stormwater, which increases the likelihood of infiltration and pollution removal.24 Vegetated swales are generally considered a good pretreatment method, but could be a successful method for full treatment depending on the site requirements.25

Undisturbed Soil

Bio-Retention or Rain Gardens This is one of the most innovative techniques for stormwater management and is a variation on older on-site storage facilities. A bio-retention system consists of a bio-mesh liner, a highly porous soil mixture, a layer of mulch, and is planted with a variety of grasses, shrubs, and small trees with fibrous root systems.26 This technique is used to maximize water filtration, evapo-transpiration, pollutant removal through soil filtering, sorption mecha-

Undisturbed Soil

Planting Soil Gravel Sand 105

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

nisms, and microbial transformations.27 In essence, it acts as a miniature constructed wetland and is intended to fully treat first flush runoff. Water enters a bio-retention system through one of several point sources: a curb cut, inlet pipe, or drainage grate.28 If a bio-retention area becomes full, excess water is released through an overflow pipe and will remain untreated. Though overflow leaves waters untreated, multiple bio-retention systems can be linked together to ensure overflow is distributed throughout the system and properly filtered. Maintenance and proper installation are key to a rain garden’s lasting success. The treatment of water is determined by the rate of infiltration. Faster infiltration yields higher filtering rates, so proper design is necessary for the highest level of function. The main factors affecting filtration include the size of the cell, the infiltration rates of the surrounding soils, and density of planting.29 Placement and size of cells must be carefully chosen to maximize the overall infiltration of rainwater into surrounding soils. Like vegetated swales, excessive planting can reduce the volume of water that a rain garden can handle and increases bypass. Because bio-retention systems can so effectively remove large amounts of pollution from rainwater, they must be carefully maintained to ensure clogging does not occur.30 Green Roofs Green roofs are a layer of soil mixture and plants placed on a building’s roof to reduce stormwater runoff. A system is constructed in five general layers (the layers vary depending on geography and desired result): a watertight membrane, a perforated drainage system, a geo-textile layer, growing media (a mixture of soil, sand, and various organic matter), and plants.31 Contrary to popular belief, maintenance of green roofs is very low and typically only consists of watering in cases of exceptional drought. Green roofs provide a number of positive externalities in addition to stormwater treatment including aesthetic value and added insulation. The added weight typically necessitates the addition of structural elements within a building, accounting

Plants Growing Media Geo-textile Layer Perforated Drainage System Watertight Membrane

106

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

for the majority of increased installation costs. Green roofs are divided into two general categories describing performance: intensive and extensive. An intensive green roof consists of a very thick layer of planting and may not cover an entire roof structure. Contrarily, extensive systems cover the whole of the roof, but lack depth. Filtration rates are compounded by the depth and density of the material present; therefore intensive roofs are seen as more effective.32 The main function of a green roof is to reduce the total amount of stormwater, slow the rate at which it leaves a roof, and lower the temperature of runoff.33 Green roofs are capable of removing a variety of pollutants, but are limited in this capacity because they are located at the beginning of water flows and the amount of pollutants found on traditional roofs is limited. They are most effective for removing nitrogen compounds found in rain.34 The Ford Rouge Center recently added the “Living Roof” to the Dearborn Truck Plant, which the world’s largest extensive green roof system.35 The system reduces the pollutant load in stormwater, the total amount of stormwater, the effects of urban heat island effect, and it will extend the life of the roof system lowering long-term capital improvement costs.36 Conclusions Bioengineering for stormwater pollution mitigation improves the longterm performance of pollution removal in urban areas. Current methods of stormwater management involve piping stormwater away from a site to an alternate location for treatment. Bioengineered systems not only reduce the amount of on site infrastructure needed for treatment, but also the amount of infrastructure used for off site transportation and treatment. Most methods of bioengineering involve little to no underground infrastructure, so replacement in cases of failure is simpler and cheaper than replacing concrete stormwater pipes, collection systems, and pollution settling systems. Bioengineering helps improve the long -term health of urban ecosystems, the health of citizens in the area, and increases the aesthetic value of neighborhoods.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

107

Bibliography Adams, B. J. & Papa, F. (2000). Urban Stormwater Management Planning with analytical Probabilistic Models. New York: John Wiley Sons, Inc. Davis, A. P. & McCuen, R.H. (2005). Stormwater Management for Smart Growth. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. Environmental & Water Resources Institute. (2001). Guide for Best Management Practice (BMP) Selection in Urban Developed Areas. The American Society of Civil Engineers. Ferguson, Bruce K. (1994) Stormwater Infiltration. New York: CRC Press. The Henry Ford: The Living Roof. Retrieved March 3, 2008 from http://www. thehenryford.org/rouge/livingroof.asp. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1996). Nonpoint Source Pollution: The Nation’s Largest Water Quality Problem. Retrieved December 04, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/facts/point1.htm.

References United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1996). Nonpoint Source Pollution: The Nation’s Largest Water Quality Problem. Retrieved December 04, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/facts/point1.htm. 2 Adams, B. J. & Papa, F. (2000). Urban Stormwater Management Planning with analytical Probabilistic Models. New York: John Wiley Sons, Inc., 53-54. 3 Davis, A. P. & McCuen, R.H. (2005). Stormwater Management for Smart Growth. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., 4. 4 United State Environmental Protection Agency. 5 Ibid. 6 Davis & McCuen, 4. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Adams & Papa, 83. 11 Ibid., 84. 12 Ferguson, Bruce K. (1994) Stormwater Infiltration. New York: CRC Press. 157. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 158. 15 Davis & McCuen, 2. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid., 228. 18 Environmental & Water Resources Institute. (2001). Guide for Best Man1

108

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

agement Practice (BMP) Selection in Urban Developed Areas. The American Society of Civil Engineers, 35-36. 19 Davis & McCuen, 230. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid., 236. 23 Ibid., 241. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid., 236. 26 Ibid., 241. 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid., 242. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 263. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid., 264. 34 Ibid. 35 The Henry Ford: The Living Roof. Retrieved March 3, 2008 from http:// www.thehenryford.org/rouge/livingroof.asp. 36 Ibid.

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

109

Appendix E: Site Inventory
Site Inventory Site ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Road 1 Mellon Ormond Dearborn Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Melville Melville Jefferson Waterman Jefferson Jefferson Hammond Jefferson Jefferson Fort Michigan Clark Oakwood Fort Fort Rademacher Waterman Cavalry Schaefer Michigan John Kronk Melville Dearborn Warren Jefferson Michigan Michigan Desmond Rotunda Lawndale Road 2 Dix Rouge Fort Springwells Springwells Springwells Springwells Crossley Green Springwells Dix Campbell Campbell Federal Summit Summit Swain Scotten Junction Sanders Hubbard Clark Reid South Anthon Rotunda I-94 Lonyo Harbaugh Miller Epworth Rosa Parks I-94 I-94 Casgrain Commerce I-75 Mullane Miller Post Campbell I-94 I-75 McKinstry Clark McKinstry Reeder Vernor Gould Powell Miller Road 3

110

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Schaefer Schaefer Schaefer Schaefer Schaefer Schaefer Barron Jefferson Luther Pleasant Pleasant Marion Michigan Livernois

Ford River Rouge Ford River Rouge Ford River Rouge I-94 I-94 Butler Foreman Fort Wayne Colonial Liddesdale Leonard Great Lakes Mercury I-94 American Beatrice Ormond

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

111

Appendix F: Community Partners
POTENTIAL COMMUNITY PARTNERS Name Non Profit Organizations: Greening of Detroit 313.237.8733 The Greening of Detroit exists to improve the 1418 Michigan Avenue, Detroit, MI 48126 quality of life in Detroit by guiding and inspiring the reforestation of Detroit's neighborhoods, boulevards, and parks through tree planting projects and educational programs Established to continue a historical interest of N/A people in providing social services to the especially needy neighborhoods of the Metropolitan Detroit area, so as to meet the needs of the individuals and families of the community without regard to race, sex, age, or religion Support Latino Americans for social and economic development. Formed to address the disproportional burdens faced by people of color and low income residents in environmentally distressed communities. 7150 West Vernor, Detroit, MI 48209 4750 Woodward Ave., Suite 406, Detroit, MI 48201 www.greening of detroit.com Contact Interest/Mission Address Website

People's Community Services

N/A

http://www.pecose.org/

Latin Americans for Social & Economic Development Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice

313-841-8840 313-833-DWEJ (3935)

N/A http://www.dwej.org/

Southwest Solutions

ACCESS (Dearborn)

(313) 842-7010

Improve the health and well-being of individuals and 1700 Waterman Street, Detroit, MI 48209 families while making southwest Detroit a great place to live, work and play. A human services organization committed to the 2651 Saulino Ct., Dearborn, MI 48120 development of the Arab American community, and the greater community. To support this goal, ACCESS provides a wide range of human and cultural services as well as advocacy work.

www.swsol.org

http://www.accesscommunity.org

American Muslim Society Salina Elementary School Concerned Residents of Dearborn

313-842-9000 (313) 827-6550 To preserve and maintain integrity, stability and property values. To encourage neighborliness and pride of living in the South End community. To promote and advance the civic, economic and social welfare of the people. To educate and empower the residents. To ensure and encourage the upkeep of all properties in compliance with city ordinances. To work for the construction and upkeep of necessary public and private improvements. To foster a sense of a thriving, prosperous and proud community in the City of Dearborn. Through the entire community’s support, we want to establish closer ties with the area schools, religious institutions, businesses and other associations with the sole intent on enhancing the livelihood and best interests of our residents. CRSD plans an aggressive growth agenda to better serve its residents and act as their fiber optic communication like with their city and government representatives. We can only grow through the support of our community.

9945 W. Vernor Hwy, Dearborn, MI 48126 tp://www.masjiddearborn.org/ 2700 Ferney, Dearborn, MI 48120 Suite 101, Dix Road, Dearborn, MI 48120

CRSD48120@aol.com

Yemin American Benevolent Organization Southwest Detroit Development Collaborative Detroit Hispanic Development Corp

(313) 967-4880

Latino Family Services

(313) 841-7380

CHASS

(313) 849-3920

Provides human services and community development projects primarily in Southwest Detroit, through collaborations that create opportunities for employment, education and healthy lifestyles A community agency providing family, youth, seniors, AIDS, and developmentally disabled persons services. A comprehensive primary care clinic that serves the medical needs of the City's southwest and eastside communities with an emphasis on the Hispanic and African-American populations.

1211 Trumbull, Detroit, MI 48216

http://www.dhdc1.org/

3815 West Fort Street, Detroit MI 48216

N/A

5635 W. Fort Street, Detroit, Michigan 48209

http://www.chasscenter.org/

112

Breathing Easier in Southwest Detroit

Public Agencies

US Forest Service

(800) 832-1355

The Forest Service manages public lands in 1400 Independence Ave., SW, national forests and grasslands, which encompass Washington, D.C., 20250-0003 193 million acres.

http://www.fs.fed.us/

Michigan DNR Local watershed groups: Friends of the Rouge

313-792-9900

Promoting restoration and stewardship of the
Rouge River ecosystem through education, citizen involvement and other collaborative efforts, for the purpose of improving the quality of life of the people, plants and animals of the watershed.

4901 Evergreen, 220 ASC, Dearborn, MI 48128

http://www.therouge.org/

Friends of the Detroit River

734.675.0141

Enhance the environmental, educational, economic, 2674 W. Jefferson, Suite LL1, Trenton, cultural and recreational opportunities associated MI 48183 with the Detroit River watershed through citizen involvement and community action. To manage and coordinate the environmental affairs of the City of Detroit through the development and implementation of a coordinated and comprehensive environmental policy. To strengthen and revitalize the City of Detroit's neighborhoods and communities and to stabilize and transform our physical, social and economic environment. N/A 660 Woodward Avenue, Suite 1800, First National Building, Detroit, MI 48226

http://www.detroitriver.org/

City of Detroit, Dept of Environmental Affairs

313.471.5100

http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/environaf fairs/default.htm

City of Detroit, Planning Department

313 224-6380

65 Cadillac Square, Suite 2300, Detroit, Michigan 48226

http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/plandevl/

Councilman Ken V. Cockrel, Jr. Green Task Force Chair

(313) 224-4505

1340 Coleman A. Young Municipal Center, http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/legislativ 2 Woodward Ave, Detroit, MI 48226 e/CityCouncil/Default.htm

Fort Street Business Association Business Associations Southwest Detroit Business Association 313.842.0986 Founded in 1957, the Southwest Detroit Business 7752 West Vernor Highway, Detroit, Association fosters innovation, drive, and Michigan 48209 commitment in our community. We work with investors, entrepreneurs, customers, and neighbors to capitalize on Southwest Detroit’s competitive advantage. We support our community’s vision for a healthy, vibrant neighborhood. Together we are developing a place where more people are choosing to live, work, invest, shop, and play – a place where you will find Business Building Community. Community Building Business. The Michigan Avenue Business Association is N/A working to retain businesses like Prince Valley while attracting new businesses to vacant building and lots. They have partnered with the Michigan Department of Transportation to enhance the two miles of Michigan Avenue between Wyoming and Livernois Founded in 1999 to improve the Oakwood Heights N/A area for the benefit of buisness and the residents in the community. http://www.southwestdetroit.com/

Michigan Avenue Business Assocation

313-841-1870

N/A

Oakwood Heights Business Association

N/A

http://www.oakwoodheights.net/inde x.htm

Corporations

Arvin Meritor Ford Motor Company DTE Energy Marathon Petroleum Company Severstal, NA

1-800-532-8857

www.arvinmeritor.com http://www.ford.com/ http://www.dteenergy.com/communit 2000 2nd Avenue, Detroit, MI 48226 y/ www.marathon.com 14661 Rotunda Drive, Dearborn, Michigan http://www.severstalna.com/ 48120-1699 8800 Dix Avenue Detroit, MI 48209 http://www.edwclevy.com/index.asp http://www.detroitsalt.com/contact.h tm

Edward Levy Co. Detroit Salt Company (313) 843-7200 313-841-5144

12841 Sanders, Detroit, MI 48217

University of Michigan: Urban + Regional Planning Program

113

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful