Skip to Main Content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government


Profile Information

Government
263088
2026 Lawndale Street DETROIT, MI 48209
.29
20006103-4
42.307876009637 / -83.131263993276
13
Didier, Matt
Didier.Matthew@epa.gov
312-353-2112


Top of Page


Property Location



Top of Page


Property Progress


Top of Page


CAs Associated with this Property

CA NameCA #StateTypeAnnouncement Year
County of Wayne4B00E03553MIAssessment2023


Top of Page


Assessment Activities at this Property

ActivityEPA FundingStart DateCompletion DateCAAccomplishment Counted?Counted When?
Cleanup Planning$17,610.0011/19/202401/27/2025County of Wayne
Phase I Environmental Assessment08/03/202311/03/2023County of Wayne


Is Cleanup Necessary? Yes
EPA Assessment Funding: $17,610.00
Leveraged Funding: $2,983.57
Total Funding: $20,593.57


Top of Page


Climate Adaption and Mitigation - Planning or Assessment

There is no data for Climate Adaption and Mitigation - Planning or Assessment.


Top of Page


Contaminants and Media


VOCs
NOT Cleaned up

Cleanup Activities

There are no current cleanup activities.


Cleanup/Treatment Implemented: N
Cleanup/Treatement Categories:
Addl Cleanup/Treatment info:
Address of Data Source:
Total ACRES Cleaned Up: .29
Number of Cleanup Jobs Leveraged:
EPA Cleanup Funding:
Leveraged Funding:
Cost Share Funding:
Total Funding:


Top of Page


Climate Adaption and Mitigation - Demolition or Cleanup

There is no data for Climate Adaption and Mitigation - Demolition or Cleanup.


Top of Page


Institutional and Engineering Controls

No
Yes
Engineered Barriers (e.g., Slurry Walls, Sheet)
A Sub-Slab Depressurization System is required.
No


Top of Page


Redevelopment and Other Leveraged Accomplishments

There are no current redevelopment activities.


Number of Redevelopment Jobs Leveraged:
Actual Acreage of Greenspace Created:
Leveraged Funding:


Top of Page


Climate Adaption and Mitigation - Redevelopment

There is no data for Climate Adaption and Mitigation – Redevelopment


Top of Page


Additional Property Attributes

The following is a summary of the findings from the constructability evaluation and PFE testing:

* The building while a single structure; is comprised of the four separate foundation areas identified above and includes additional interior sub-gradient footings and interior demising wall and various block walls extending through the first to the ceiling space.

* The southern portion of the subject building contains a crawlspace and partial basement and is the original building constructed at the 2026 Lawndale Street.

* A small portion of the building east of the basement is slab on grade as well as an addition that occurred in 1953 that added approximately 4,500 square feet on slab on grade space to the north.
.
* Building construction does vary between each of the four building areas. Brick basement walls were observed in the basement area with an adjacent wood constructed crawl space. Other portions of the building utilize slab on grade concrete floors and cinderblock walls with 2x4 wood construction interior drywall.

* The geophysical survey identified sanitary piping and drains in various areas of the subject building as well as within the partial basement.

* The geophysical survey of building floor slabs indicates the slab thickness is consistent between the units at a thickness of four to five inches, however, is interrupted by the presence of interior footings that extend beyond 12-inches in thickness.

* The locations of structural columns in the northern addition appear to have an associated subgrade footing.

* Downspouts and downspout extensions were consistently lacking in south and east sides of each the building.

* No evidence of water intrusion (both historical and present) was observed within the partial basement walls. However, without the presence of a sump and pump the potential for water intrusion should be monitored and addressed if encountered.

* Extraction location EX-1 positioned with the partial basement space exhibited the highest airflow of the test locations. This increase in flow appears to be correlated to presence of a coarse fill material beneath the floor slab as well as subgrade sanitary and floor drains present within the space.

* Sub-gradient sanitary pipes were identified during the constructability evaluation and appear to have effect on the vacuum radius or PFE beneath the building floor slab as EX-2 was not able to obtain pressure field extension beyond the sanitary lines present in the test area. Additional investigation into the relationship between the presence of these and possible efforts such as sealing, may be required at or after the time of installation of a mitigation system.

* The airflow to vacuum relationship at location EX-1 indicates that the airflow increases at a greater rate than the vacuum during the testing. This is likely due to the presence of a coarse material below the floor slab and test location proximity to sub gradient footing and sanitary lines present.

* Varying soil types were observed in the test area of EX-1 when compared the EX-2 and EX-3. The characteristics of these soils are consistent with the increased airflow observed in this area of the building.

* The rate of increase in vacuum ROI decreased above approximately 1.1 inWC of applied vacuum at extraction location EX-1. However, it decreased between 5.1 and 6.1 inWC at locations EX-2 and EX-3. Likely, some variability in design will be required given the difference in tests.

* The characteristics of the basement PFE test varied grossly from the other test locations and given its proximity to the slab on grade portions that may also receive SSD, likely future design will specify its own separate SSD system from the other portions of the building.

* Given ROI and airflow relationships and variability observed, a likely recommended design vacuum for the extraction point/suction pits is a vacuum of up to 1.1 inWC and 36 CFM for the basement and up t
Commercial (.29)


Top of Page