Freeways Don’t Need to be a Housing Show-Stopper

20

20 by Phil Philms, on Flickr

It’s common sense that living near a freeway isn’t healthy. The pollution from the cars and grit from the roadway make for what most would term a wholly unpleasant experience. Unfortunately, the only places for infill development, not to mention quite a few SMART stations, are near Highway 101. Before any post-SMART buildings are built, communities in Marin and Sonoma need to take measures to mitigate these negative health effects, or we’ll simply be building health problems for the future.

Roadway pollution is almost entirely from tailpipe emissions, and most of the health effects are from particulate material, that brown smoke most recognizably seen coming out of large truck exhaust pipes.  It’s nasty stuff (PDF), not only because the shape of the particles increases the risk of asthma and lung cancer but because they carry heavy metals, which can contribute to diminished brain formation in children.  Gases, such as carbon monoxide, are less hazardous to the health of nearby residents.

These particulates, at least when they come from a freeway, are concentrated within 200 feet of the road, though they are measurable up to half a mile away during the day and 1.5 miles away during the early morning hours.  In Marin, that means a huge portion of the county lives with 101’s pollution: all of San Rafael, most of Novato, Greenbrae, Mill Valley, Corte Madera and Larkspur, Marin City, and Sausalito lives within the freeway’s pollution plume. Only Ross Valley and West Marin don’t need to deal with the problem, though arterial roads generate their own plumes.

Within that 200 foot buffer, though, is the most danger, and the most opportunity to cut pollution.  Solid barriers, such as sound walls, send the pollution upward, dispersing it but still leaving high concentrations near the freeway.  Plant barriers (PDF) also send a plume upward, but much less pollution reaches the areas near the freeway. Instead, they collect the particulates on leaves and act as natural filters.  Using both solid barriers and plant barriers, of course, yields better results than using only one.

Practically, this means that, wherever pollution is a concern, local government and Caltrans should try to plant trees and build walls to contain and filter out the pollutants.

Another tool in our air pollution mitigation toolbox is building design. Most people spend most of their time inside. When discussing pollutants, it’s ultimately about how the pollution gets into apartments or offices. Most obviously, plants can be grown on rooftops and on the sides of buildings to filter pollutants in concert with whatever is next to the freeway. Inside the building, the county can require air filters.

Air filters for freeway pollution are effective. Most particulates can be filtered with specialized HVAC systems that, though they run upwards of $700 per apartment unit per year to operate, though yield an estimated $2,100 in health care savings annually.  These systems are required in San Francisco for developments near freeways and are a logical step for Marin to take. The county might go the extra step to subsidize the filters for affordable units included in market-rate developments.  However, these don’t filter out ultrafine particles, which constitute most of the particulates in freeway pollution. Laboratory-quality HEPA filters are even more expensive than San Francisco’s standard, but not much more, and could be encouraged through subsidy or required by law.

Exposure could be further limited by encouraging office development closest to the freeway.  The buildings, along with rooftop gardens, would act as a pollution wall for residences further back.

In short, while air pollution is a major concern for building new residences along the freeway, it should not be a show-stopper. Building higher up the valleys or sprawling outward in other parts of the region will only make traffic and pollution worse. The North Bay’s governments need to make mitigation part of their building codes before any more major developments are built if they want to get ahead of the curve. It will save them money in the long-run and will make their new communities far more livable than they would be otherwise.

About these ads

About David Edmondson
A native Marinite working in Washington, DC, I am fascinated by how one might apply smart-growth and urbanist thinking to the low-density towns of my home.

15 Responses to Freeways Don’t Need to be a Housing Show-Stopper

  1. Pingback: On Transport, Romney-Ryan Ticket Presents Extreme Contrast to Obama | Streetsblog.net

  2. Pingback: Street Greenery is Better than Thought « The Greater Marin

  3. Mary Holman says:

    That’s the spirit. Let the low income apt dwellers inhale the heady aroma of freshly emitted carbon monoxide. Nothing like a big ugly section 8 building at the Civic center, while acres of land lies fallow just miles north.

  4. Richard Hall says:

    Dave you state “It’s common sense that living near a freeway isn’t healthy” – many medical studies conclusively agree with you. Your exact point was made to the mayor and council of San Rafael at the council meeting on August 20th by a Medical Doctor.

    Can you please therefore explain why the CIvic Center Station plan proposes adding 620 new units to help justify SMART train ridership, many of which are located within 200 feet of a freeway overpass?

    • The point of the article was to see how we could mitigate those concerns. The questions I attempted to answer were, If cities want to zone for residences here, how can it do so in a healthy way? What should be required, what should be merely encouraged? Should we place a blanket ban on residences within X feet of the freeway?

  5. Richard Hall says:

    That’s not what’s happening. The concerns aren’t being mitigated. Committee’s and councils are proceeding without incorporating community feedback into the body of the plan (a feeble “attachment” to the plan was offered).

    • Unfortunately you’re right. It’s also telling that nobody voted against the Station Area Plan. I think it’s because of the at-large nature of the council, which might benefit from a district system.

    • By the way, that’s also why I wrote this article. I wanted to know what the problems would be and how to address them. Building housing without addressing them would be a mistake, so as the Council goes through its rezoning process it ought to require developers to mitigate the problem without unduly harming the viability of a given project.

      I’m planning a response to the Council vote sometime next week or next Monday, because something feels wrong about it. Even though I support the rezoning, the strength and legitimacy of the City Council is more important and this showed a weakness of the system.

  6. ROGER THORTON says:

    Dave, I was all set to respond to a comment on the Tempest in Teapot blog, although I see you have censored it. You claim to desire an open discourse–apparently the only discourse you are interested in is from those that agree with you. Typical of those that believe they have vision and everybody else needs bifocals.

    • I’m sorry, which comment? I haven’t censored any on that post; I leave up the comment and add that a) it’s been removed, and b) why it’s been removed. I only do this to comments that are in violation of the comment policy.

    • Wait a sec, I know the one you’re talking about. Told me to butt the hell out of Marin or somesuch.

      Didn’t touch it; it was posted before the comments policy and so therefore couldn’t have been in violation of it.

      As well: please comment on the appropriate post rather than any post you find.

  7. ROGER THORTON says:

    Dave, please refrain from suggestion your comments policy is anything other than your opinion as to what is out-of-bounds because you disagree. . It isn’t as if you have some editorial board.

    I am referring to the thread on the Tempest in a Teapot post where you deny this blog is a pander-fest for the development agenda from which you seek work. I can not see anywhere on this one sided blog where you oppose any projects with even remotely the same intensity that you advocate growth. You even opposed a park in San Anselmo.

    So the comment, that you are merely beating a drum for the development agenda is far from baseless.

    • The comment policy enforces the notions that a) comments will be on topic for the post they’re on (this conversation is off-topic for the post you’ve commented on), and b) will not resort to ad hominem attacks. This is the difference between, “Your idea sucks because you’re a pandering carpet-bagger,” and, “Your idea sucks because you didn’t take into consideration the viewshed in downtown San Anselmo and the widespread unhappiness with Creek Park.” The first is unacceptable, the second is not.
      I’m presenting my opinions as points to start a discussion. Tell me why it’s a good idea to demolish a building in downtown San Anselmo and replace it with a park, not that I’m a shill for a government-development complex. Tell me why my analysis of Corte Madera’s historic growth rate is flawed. I want, genuinely want, an open and fair discussion about how Marin should, and shouldn’t, grow. Take the comments section on my latest post: there’s back and forth, it’s a little testy but everyone is addressing the topic or concepts. If someone came in and started attacking your character and integrity I’d remove their comment, too.

      The comments are right where we left them; I’m surprised you aren’t seeing them.

  8. Pingback: Mid-Week Links: Freedom « The Greater Marin

  9. Julia says:

    Helpful info. Lucky me I discovered your website by accident, and I am stunned why
    this twist of fate did not came about earlier! I bookmarked it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 489 other followers

%d bloggers like this: