Environmental Assessment of Dust Pollution in Point-Pattern Housing Development

Abstract

In megacities, the rapid development of construction entails threats to the environment, in particular, to the health of urban residents. One of the main sources of danger is microscopic dust particles PM_2.5 and PM₁₀, resulting from construction projects that can seriously impair people’s health. To minimize these risks, it is necessary to actively implement control over the level of dust in the air and carry out scientific work to study the impact of construction on the environment. These measures should become mandatory aspects in the planning of modern cities, given that the degree of air pollution in large cities has already reached critical levels. In modern megacities, where development is intensive and, in some places, very dense, there is a key importance of environmental audit of territories intended for construction, for creating effective and safe development projects. The lack of adequate risk control during the construction stages can lead not only to emergencies, but also have a harmful impact on the natural environment. It is worth noting that environmental hazards can vary significantly depending on the unique characteristics of each specific construction site. As a result of an in-depth analysis of the ecological state of the region, which included an assessment of various levels of pollution and their impact on the health of residents, it was found that intensive construction in some areas of the city significantly worsens the ecological situation. In particular, it was found that the level of dust pollution in areas with active construction exceeds the regulatory indicators by two times, which indicates a serious environmental problem. These data highlight the need for targeted actions to improve air quality and reduce harmful air emissions. Thus, the study raises the alarm about the point-pattern housing development as a source of high environmental danger and underlines the development of strategies for air purification in the city. The PM₁₀ contamination level was 671.6 micrograms per cubic meter, while PM_2.5 was at 368.2 micrograms per cubic meter. These data indicate that the main cause of pollution is local dust exposure.

1. Introduction

The dust concentration in the urban atmosphere can vary significantly depending on the territory, season time, and dust sources [1]. These particulates have diverse sources, including human activities, natural processes, and chemical reactions in the Earth’s atmosphere [2]. Construction activities, in particular, pose a significant risk to air quality, especially in urban areas [3,4]. The fine dust particles are released into the air throughout various construction processes from earthworks to mixing building materials [5,6,7,8].

There are noticeable fluctuations in the levels of aerosols and dust particles due to changes in temperature in urban environments [9]. These particulate matters interact with various atmospheric elements and pollutants as they move through urban spaces, leading to alterations in their chemical composition [10,11].

The presence of harmful emissions, such as PM_2.5 and PM₁₀, from construction sites poses a dual challenge not only for the construction workers’ health but also for residents living near construction sites [12,13,14,15,16]. Recent research led by Qiming Luo and his team highlighted the high levels of air pollution generated during construction activities like concrete mixing and marble processing [17]. The critical situation arises as the levels of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ in the air can exceed NAAQS norms by 60–100 times during brick cutting [18]. These findings underscore the urgent need to address air quality issues in and around construction sites to safeguard both worker and resident health.

The impact of particulate matter in urban areas is becoming increasingly significant with the accelerated urbanization and growing population density in cities [19,20]. Air PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ pollution, contained chemical elements like silicon, phosphorus, and heavy metals such as aluminum, poses a serious environmental challenge [21].

Significant progress was made in the study of the distribution of particles in confined urban spaces, thanks to the innovative work carried out by a team led by Zhang Yisheng [22]. This group of researchers adopted a unique approach by combining computer simulations with real-world wind tunnel experiments to analyze the dispersion of dust on construction sites, resulting in notable scientific advancements.

A global collaboration of scientists from the United States, China, various European countries, Korea, and the United Kingdom came together to collectively tackle the issue of air pollution caused by construction dust [23,24,25,26,27,28].

Sang-Woo Han and his team developed an innovative method to investigate the spread of construction dust in densely populated areas [29]. Their main solution is a hybrid dust pollution monitoring model with utilizing sensors to monitor dust dispersion. Additionally, Bo Yu’s team conducted a study analyzing the influence of construction activities on air quality, focusing on factors such as frequency, intensity, and concentration levels of dust [30]. Guowu Tao suggested an organization of construction site locations utilizing the MOPSO method for mitigating the environmental impact of construction [31]. Klaver and his team focused on minimizing health risks for vulnerable populations by studying the effectiveness of HEPA PAF filters in purifying the air in residences near construction sites [32].

It is evident that extensive efforts were dedicated to investigate dust emissions PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ from construction activities based on the analysis of previous research. Nevertheless, the majority of these studies concentrate on quantifying dust emissions from particular construction procedures, predominantly relying on computer simulations or the utilization of machine learning methodologies. While these approaches enable the theoretical calculations of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ concentrations in an urban environment, they do not provide the holistic evaluation of all PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ pollution sources at the construction site and concentration data over a specific construction time period using field study.

It is essential to conduct thorough analysis of air pollution levels caused by dust PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ through on-site measurements for a long period of time during construction activities. This comprehensive evaluation will provide valuable insights into the environmental impact of construction operations, considering the existing pollution levels in urban areas, as well as the unique environmental, climatic, and topographical characteristics of the investigated urban territory. Additionally, it is crucial to factor in the potential accumulation of dust pollution PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ in residential areas resulting from construction activities. The PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ dust pollution mitigating instrument is the complex field study of all construction processes’ dust production, the dynamics of dust concentration in the residential area from the particular construction processes operating, and the total dust pollution calculation for the complex dust control system in urban area development.

The purpose of this study is the comprehensive environmental risk assessment of urban air dust pollution caused by point-pattern housing development. The research evaluates the dust total emissions, the environmental risks associated with dust pollution containing PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ generated by construction activities in the residential area, focusing on its potential impact on residents’ health. Emphasis is placed on analyzing the concentration of chemical elements found in these particles and their effects on the air quality in residential areas near the construction site.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Dust Pollution from Construction Processes Analysis

Rostov-on-Don, a prominent city in southern Russia known for its size and ranking as the eleventh most populous city in the country, is currently undergoing rapid development. The city is continuously expanding through the construction of new residential complexes, homes, and various facilities, which are essential components for urban infrastructure progress. Each day, the number of these developments in Rostov-on-Don is on the rise. Nevertheless, despite its swift growth and advancements, the city is grappling with environmental issues that are raising concerns among its residents.

Dust pollution is a significant issue often observed in the construction sites of point-pattern housing developments. This dust, comprising up to 70% silicon dioxide, is commonly present in materials like cement, chamotte, and industrial waste [33,34]. In the western part of Rostov-on-Don, renowned for its high-rise residential complexes, an air quality study was initiated specifically focusing on dust pollution. The study area and phases of environmental assessment of the urban territory related to point-pattern housing development are shown in Figure 1.

During the study, we utilized the electric respirator PU-3E/12 by Ximko (Moscow, Russia), which is equipped with specialized perchlorovinyl fiber filters with a surface area of 10 cm² designed to capture PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ particles. Sampling was conducted systematically twice a week from May to October 2022 during the dismantling, site preparation, and foundation works of a point-pattern housing construction project; the total number of samples is 32. The research period was selected based on the heightened construction activity typically observed during the spring–summer season in the city of Rostov-on-Don. Each sampling session lasted 120 min in accordance with GOST R 58577-2019 [35]. The collected samples were carefully placed in paper envelopes, then securely wrapped in aluminum foil for transportation to the laboratory. Upon arrival, the samples were weighed, stored in a desiccator at −20 degrees Celsius, and kept there until the analytical study began. The meteorological conditions exhibited significant variability. The wind speed ranged from 3 to 7 m/s, temperatures fluctuated between +14 and +25 degrees Celsius, and humidity levels fell within the range of 30–60%. We utilized the WIN-SFV32 v1.0 software integrated into an electronic air analysis device to ensure accurate measurements. This software facilitated precise calibration and verification of the collected data. Subsequently, the samples underwent treatment on a specialized filter with an acid mixture composed of HCl and HNO₃ in a 3:1 ratio, with the addition of 10 mL of the solution to enable thorough analysis.

The mass concentration of dust was determined using the gravimetric method by subtracting the weight of the clean filter from the weight of the filter after sample collection, and then normalizing the result by the volume of air filtered through the filter. The analytical measurement error ranged from 0.5% to 1.6%.

When assessing air pollution from dust emitted by the studied object, two main aspects were considered. Firstly, the effectiveness of the actions taken was evaluated by analyzing the pollutant volume and sample collection time, while also considering changes in weather conditions. Secondly, the percentage of dust particles with a diameter not exceeding 200 μm was measured in a sample obtained through washing and filtering.

The presence of particles smaller than 10 μm has been identified as a key factor in dust formation. Dust is emitted during various operations like welding, drilling, dismantling, and handling bitumen and is controlled using specialized equipment for capture as well as less-structured processing methods. The efficiency of this process is significantly impacted by the size of dust particles and the moisture content of materials, especially those with fine-grained structures or particles smaller than 1 mm.

The comprehensive analysis of atmospheric dust pollution included assessing factors like wind intensity in the area during a specified period, the amount of dust released into the air during building deconstruction and material handling operations, and the utilization of machinery such as excavators, grabs, and bulldozers. These variables were considered as crucial coefficients for controlling the level of dust emissions into the atmosphere [36].

Construction activities, such as moving bulk materials (including dredging, backfilling, and compaction), dismantling structures, site preparation, and loading construction debris into containers, were identified as major contributors to the elevated levels of dust in the atmosphere. These activities were found to be the primary factors driving the increase in airborne dust levels [37].

The analysis of the air emissions effects from construction processes within a dense residential area in Rostov-on-Don, in order to determine their impact on air quality, was conducted using the software «Ecologist» version 4.60.6 by «Integral» company (St. Petersburg, Russia) for dust pollution modeling. The impact on atmospheric air assessment was considered during the following construction processes: dismantling works, mechanical earthworks, backfilling, foundation works, job-site layout, drilling works, welding works, bitumen sealing, PVC pipe welding, inert materials recycling, work-site protection works, temporary construction facilities laying, and paint works. The impact on atmospheric air had a temporary nature. The maximum single emission of pollutants was determined taking into account the factor of simultaneity of the work performed. The local coordinate system of the construction site was used for modeling with the Y-axis pointing north and the X-axis pointing east. The study took into account various aspects, including meteorological conditions and specific coefficients, which play a key role in determining the distribution mechanisms of pollutants in the atmosphere of a given area. The analysis of air pollution levels was carried out on a 320-by-420 m plot divided into a grid with 20-by-20 m cells. Assessment of compliance with pollution standards was carried out by comparing data with four control points located on the periphery of the residential area near the residential complex, where the construction site is located, presented in

Table 1. Coordinates of calculated points.

Coordinates		Height, m	Point Type
X	Y
47.19484	39.61901	2	On the border of the residential area
47.19327	39.6237	2	On the border of the residential area
47.19592	39.62466	2	On the border of the residential area
47.19661	39.62168	2	On the border of the residential area

. Verification of the accuracy of the simulation data was determined through systematic dust measurements and sampling at the construction site using the electric respirator PU-3E/12.

2.2. The Environmental Risk Assessment of Residential Area

In addition to the conducted modeling and analysis of dust pollution, an assessment of environmental risks in the urban area near the construction site of a point-pattern development was made according to the following indicators:

• Geoaccumulation coefficient I_geo—an indicator for assessing the concentration of a pollutant (chemical element) in the sample C_i and the total air concentration of the study area C_total: less than 0—no pollution; 0–1—low; 1–2—moderate; 2–3—moderate or strong; 3–4—strong; 4–5—strong or critical; more than 5—critical [38];

$$I_{geo}={\log }_2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{C_i}{1.5\times C_{total}}}\right].$$

(1)

2.

Pollution coefficient K_P—indicator of the ratio of the concentration of the chemical element under study C_i to the total concentration of this element in the air of the study area C_n: less than 1—low; 1–3—moderate; 3–6—strong; more than 6—critical [39];

$$K_P={\displaystyle \frac{C_i}{C_n}}.$$

(2)

3.

The environmental risk coefficient Er gives an estimate of the potential environmental hazard of a pollutant, according to its toxicity of the chemical element (R, PM_2.5–PM₁₀ = 50 [40]) in a certain air environment: less than 10—low; 10–20—moderate; 20–40—strong; 40–80—critical [41];

$$E_r={\displaystyle \frac{R}{K_P}}.$$

(3)

4.

Pollution load index PLI, which determines the degree of change in the air environment due to the total negative impact of pollutants n: less than 2—low; 2–4—moderate; 4–6—strong; more than 6—critical [42];

$$PLI={\left(K_{P1}\times K_{P2}\times \dots K_{Pn}\right)}^{1/n}.$$

(4)

5.

Complex environmental risk indicator RI: less than 50—low; at 50–300—moderate; at 300–600—strong; more than 600—critical [43].

$$RI={\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^n{E}_r}.$$

(5)

While indicators such as I_geo, K_P, and E_r specialize in the analysis of individual pollutants, PLI and RI provide a broad perspective, assessing total pollution and its possible health risks. Thus, two groups of indicators can be distinguished: those that focus on individual components, and those that assess the impact of pollutants in general.

3. Results

The modeling results for PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ indicate that during the construction processes studied, pollutant levels reached a peak of 1.9 tons per year. This calculation accounted for emissions from all sources of pollution simultaneously, identifying this period as the most significant in terms of atmospheric contamination. The types of dust pollutants released during this timeframe are specified in

Table 2. Types of dust pollutants released during construction works.

№	Pollutant	Dust Source
1	Inorganic dust containing more than 70% silicon dioxide	Dismantling works
2	Inorganic dust containing up to 70% silicon dioxide (chamotte, cement, cement production dust—clay, shale, blast furnace slag, sand, clinker, silica ash, and others)	Dismantling works, mechanical earthworks, backfilling, foundation works
3	Inorganic dust containing less than 20% silicon dioxide (dolomite, cement production dust—limestone, chalk, cinder blocks, bauxite)	Dismantling works, job-site layout
4	Inorganic dust of phosphogypsum binder with cement	Earthworks, foundation works
5	Abrasive dust	Drilling works, welding works, bitumen sealing
6	Polypropylene dust	PVC pipe welding
7	Asbestos-containing dust	Dismantling works, inert materials recycling
8	Wood dust	Dismantling works, work-site protection works, temporary construction facilities laying
9	Dust of sulfonols	Dismantling works
10	Coal-type phenoplastics dust	Dismantling works, paint works, bitumen sealing
11	Unsaturated polyester resin dust	Bitumen sealing
12	Mica dust	Earthworks, paint works
13	Ferroalloy dust (iron—51%, silicon—47%)	Welding works
14	Dust of n-paraffins, ceresins	Dismantling works
15	Polystyrene dust	Foundation works
16	Polysulfone dust	Sealing joints
17	Dust of carbon fiber materials based on hydrate cellulose fibers	Dismantling works
18	Dust of carbon fiber materials based on polyacrylonitrile fibers	Dismantling works
19	Asbestos-containing dust (with an asbestos content of 20% or more)	Dismantling works

for further detail.

Table 3. The concentration of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ on a point-pattern construction site.

Ci, µg/m3
May	PM2.5	PM10	June	PM2.5	PM10	July	PM2.5	PM10
	272.1	491.2		232.2	455.2		228.7	455.2
	279.7	493.8		232.9	470.5		244.6	490.6
	281.6	503.6		255.7	503.2		232.2	455.2
	283.2	541.5		363.3	610.1		232.9	470.5
	267.1	499.3		368.2	617.1		232.8	471.6
	241.2	503.9		357.4	609.6		240.1	460.4
	247.2	522.3		331.8	671.6		247.2	522.3
	250.5	490.2		240.1	560.4		250.5	490.4
August	PM2.5	PM10	September	PM2.5	PM10	October	PM2.5	PM10
	232.2	455.2		250.5	490.4		250.5	490.4
	232.9	470.5		258.4	509.6		258.4	509.6
	255.7	503.2		360.3	610.1		360.3	610.1
	232.2	455.2		361.2	610.1		361.2	613.1
	232.9	470.5		358.4	609.6		328.4	606.6
	255.7	503.2		332.8	671.6		322.8	651.6
	241.2	503.9		272.1	591.2		272.1	591.2
	247.2	522.3		279.7	493.8		279.7	493.8

shows the levels of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ measured at the construction site between May and October 2022.

The study showed that during construction work, the levels of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ concentration regularly exceeded the regulatory limits by 60–75% [44]. Such indicators were associated with active traffic on the construction site, which was engaged in the transportation of soil for reclamation and delivery of construction materials. During the year, there were three main cases of high concentration: in June, September, and October. In June, the level of contamination increased due to excavation and compaction of the ground in the pit, in September due to welding work for the foundation plate, and in October due to backfilling and compaction of the ground after the completion of the main construction activities.

During the study period, for the levels of air pollution with PM₁₀ particles in the area near the construction site, the highest level, reaching 671.6 µg/m³, was observed in late June and September, while the lowest level, 455.2 µg/m³, was recorded in early June, July, and August. The average concentration of PM₁₀ during the study was 534 µg/m³, which is 1.74 times higher than the maximum permissible concentration (MPC) [45]. The study of dust pollution levels showed that the values most often exceeded the norm, which could pose a serious threat to the health of all categories of the population, including the most vulnerable groups of people.

The maximum permissible concentrations of PM_2.5 reached levels from 318.73 µg/m³ to 368.2 µg/m³. Such levels of pollution are particularly risky for those with increased susceptibility and can contribute to exacerbating asthma attacks and negatively affect the functioning of the cardiovascular system. Figure 2 shows the dynamics of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ concentration on the point-pattern construction site.

4. Discussion

The chemical elements present in samples collected at the construction site were analyzed using a Versa 3D scanning double-beam electron microscope manufactured by FEI (USA). The composition of elements found in construction dust particles is detailed in

Table 4. The dust pollution elements of construction work on the point-pattern construction site.

№	Elements	Dust Source
1	Al2O3	Dismantling works
2	Bi2O3	Foundation works
3	Fe2(SO4)3	Work-site protection works, temporary construction facilities laying
4	FeO, Fe2O3	Dismantling works, foundation works, welding works
5	K2CO3	Foundation works
6	CaO	Foundation works
7	CaC2	Dismantling works, inert materials recycling
8	LiCl	Welding works
9	MgO	Foundation works
10	Cl2MgO6·H2O	Foundation works
11	CuSO4	Temporary construction facilities laying
12	MnO2	Foundation works
13	CuO	Dismantling works
14	Pb	Unloading of materials, loading of construction waste
15	C	Foundation works, bitumen sealing
16	SO2	Earthworks, foundation works, road construction works, engineering communications and service pipelines works, unloading of materials, loading of construction waste
17	P2O5	Unloading of materials, loading of construction waste
18	NO2	Earthworks, welding works, unloading of materials, loading of construction waste
19	CO	Unloading of materials, loading of construction waste
20	MnO2	Foundation works, bitumen sealing, unloading of materials, loading of construction waste
21	Si	Foundation works

.

Iron and calcium are crucial components in the elemental composition of construction dust, which accounts for their prevalence in the majority of samples. These elements are fundamental building blocks of many construction materials, thus explaining their dominant presence. Elevated levels of iron and calcium in the dust can be attributed to their inclusion in construction waste and reinforced concrete structures. Furthermore, the concentration of iron, aluminum, manganese, and other heavy metals observed in the dust samples is influenced by various anthropogenic factors, such as the introduction of components from tires and brake pads as a byproduct of extensive transportation activities at the construction site. The high amounts of silicon were detected in construction dust, primarily resulting from activities like cutting, sawing, drilling, and fracturing materials such as stone, concrete, bricks, blocks, and petrified mortar, as well as the use of industrial sand. A study conducted in a major developing city in China revealed elevated levels of iron, manganese, and nickel in construction dust, all of which are associated with human activities such as car part corrosion, vehicle emissions, and improper waste disposal in windy conditions.

The environmental risk assessment was conducted for the urban area surrounding the construction site after analyzing the data on dust pollution.

Table 5. Results of environmental risk assessment of the territory near the point-pattern construction site.

	Igeo			KP			Er
	Min	Max	Mean	Min	Max	Mean	Min	Max	Mean
PM2.5	1	3	2	2.9	4.3	3.6	11.62	17.24	14.43
PM10	1	3	2	3.9	5.2	4.5	9.61	12.82	11.21

presents an analysis of the environmental risks associated with air quality degradation due to the ongoing point-pattern construction activities in the area.

In the study of the urban area, a significant excess of environmental standards was found, which is confirmed by the environmental load factor PLI equal to 8.95. This indicates critical contamination, especially considering that the RI environmental risk index reaches 626.8. The comprehensive environmental risk assessment is presented in Figure 3. Such levels of pollution pose a serious threat to the ecosystem and can negatively affect the health of local residents. In this regard, it is strongly recommended to take urgent measures to minimize the impact of harmful substances on the environment and the population.

The identified elemental composition and volumes of construction dust can cause irritation, toxic, allergic, mutagenic, carcinogenic, fibrogenic, and radioactive effects on the bodies of people living near the point-pattern housing development [46]. This can manifest itself in the form of itching, redness, urticaria, dermatitis, lacrimation, conjunctivitis, keratitis, and cataracts [47]. The most serious and almost irreversible consequence is pneumoconiosis. Inhalation of dust containing silicates with the addition of SiO₂ and associated with Al, Ca, Fe, Mg, and other elements can lead to the development of asbestosis, talcosis, and cementosis [48]. Metal dust can cause diseases such as baritosis, berylliosis, siderosis, and aluminosis, accompanied by the development of a moderate fibrous reaction in the lungs [49].

It is important to ensure comprehensive protection of the health of the population residing in the vicinity of a construction site. This entails implementing protective measures not only on the construction site itself but also in the surrounding residential areas to prevent the infiltration of dust particles through windows and entrances.

The protection dust system at the point-pattern housing development must include the following measures:

(1)

Installation of dust-collecting protective screens along the perimeter of the construction site to contain pollution within its boundaries [50];

(2)

The road laying implementation at the construction site to minimize dust emissions;

(3)

Implementation of excavation work at the construction site, taking into account meteorological data on wind speed;

(4)

Implementation of landscaping strategies to naturally mitigate dust levels on the construction site where feasible [51];

(5)

Construction waste must be stored in designated areas, regularly cleaned, and disposed of according to the established schedule. Furthermore, cement and other bulk building materials should be stored in closed warehouses or covered to prevent dust dispersion;

(6)

It is essential to utilize specialized storerooms that are dust- and moisture-proof for cement storage. It is advisable to set up a storage facility with a minimum height of 0.5 m to protect sand, stone, and other dusty materials on the construction site;

(7)

During the dismantling works, it is crucial to ensure that the open parts of the material are covered with a barrier that prevents the particles from spreading;

(8)

During on-site construction activities, it is essential to operate equipment equipped with a misting system to effectively capture PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ dust particles, thereby minimizing the dispersion of dust emissions beyond the construction site [52];

(9)

Installation of the air purifiers with a CADR of 4.3CMM at the entrances and windows of the residential buildings located next to the construction site [53];

(10)

During the construction process, it is essential to conduct environmental monitoring to accurately and promptly assess the impact of construction activities on the environment. The real-time continuous monitoring enables specialists to evaluate environmental quality effectively and promptly implement protective measures when needed. Implementing organizational and technological measures during construction work is crucial to mitigate the harmful effects of pollutants on workers and nearby residents.

This paper primarily investigates dust emissions during construction activities with the aim of reducing the potential health impacts on nearby residents. By analyzing existing data on construction site dust, we identified both commonalities and variations compared to our study findings. Unlike other studies [7,8,9,17] that focus on the elemental composition of construction dust, our study included both full-scale measurements and computer simulations to study dust emissions.

The study takes into account certain limitations associated with the analysis of dust pollution on construction sites, especially considering the importance of silica dust, whose danger increases with the content of silica. The data in the study focused on PM. The study of dust concentration includes not only individual construction processes, but also an assessment of the level of dust in residential areas, which allows you to assess the impact of dust coming from a variety of energy sources. This area of research is important for understanding the overall level of air pollution in the construction area.

5. Conclusions

In the area of point-pattern housing development in the urban residential territory, a significant excess of the norms of dust air pollution was recorded. PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ levels reached 368.2 µg/m³ and 671.6 µg/m³, respectively, which is twice the maximum permissible concentrations. This indicates the existence of a local source of air pollution. The indicators of the environmental impact of dust pollution on the environment determine the critical degree of its impact: PLI—8.95, and RI—626.8, respectively. The elemental composition of construction dust includes elements such as Al, Bi, Fe, Ca, Li, Mg, Cu, Mn, Pb, C, S, P, N, CO, and Si, which have various harmful effects on the health of residents, including irritation, allergies, and serious conditions like pneumoconiosis. It is important to ensure comprehensive protection of the health of the population residing in the vicinity of a construction site. This entails implementing protective measures not only on the construction site itself but also in the surrounding residential areas to prevent the infiltration of dust particles through windows, such as dust-collecting protective screens installation, misting systems during construction process operation, and installation of the air purifiers at the entrances and windows of the residential buildings. All these measures should become a comprehensive system for protecting the health of the population living near the point-pattern housing development in the city.

Research on the effects of construction dust and subsequent environmental assessment is essential to reduce air pollution from particulate matter. This is especially true for dynamically developing urban areas. In the light of these data, it is strongly recommended to conduct regular environmental monitoring of the atmosphere around construction areas and tighten measures to limit dust emissions. It is important that construction companies implement specific strategies to reduce pollution and ensure the safety of the public, especially vulnerable groups, from exposure to hazardous substances in the air.