Austin Street Lots Project Must Balance Housing with Health
To the Editor,
I support the mayor’s goal of expanding housing and affordability. But the Austin Street Lots project—especially Phase 1— must address serious air and noise pollution risks, and ensure a fair mix of rental and ownership units from the outset.
The site is ringed by I-93, commuter and Orange Line rail, and Boston Sand & Gravel. Prevailing westerly winds could carry exhaust, particulates, and industrial noise directly onto the site. Residents might face long-term exposure to PM2.5, NOx, ultrafine particles, and low-frequency rumble from heavy trucks—pollutants linked to respiratory and cardiovascular disease, cognitive delays in children, sleep disruption, and chronic stress.
In my opinion the developer’s studies fall short. Their noise analysis focuses on rooftop mechanicals, not ambient noise impacting residents. Air quality data relies on off-site monitors or a single sensor located too far from the highway to be meaningful.
What’s needed: a thorough environmental study using multiple monitors along the west façades of buildings A–D at varying heights, plus airflow modeling to identify pollution hotspots. This would inform better siting of air intakes, higher-grade filtration (HEPA and carbon), and design upgrades to walls and insulation.
Passive House and LEED standards—commendably adopted by the developer—will help create well-sealed, energy-efficient buildings. But if windows remain closed due to noise and air quality, these buildings could rely entirely on mechanical ventilation for fresh air. Energy Recovery Ventilators must therefore include high-grade filtration not only on intake ducts, but also on return-air ducts to manage indoor pollutants including smoke and odor.
Likewise, Passive House alone won’t address noise and vibration from nearby infrastructure. The developer should consider heavier, noise-mitigating wall assemblies and structural isolation.
The promised 58:42 rental-to-ownership mix should apply to each phase to achieve a balanced buildout. Otherwise, homeownership could be indefinitely delayed.
This project is a major opportunity: 700+ new homes in a transit-rich area. But we can’t compromise long-term health for rushed timelines and quick profits—especially at the expense of the very people this housing is meant to serve, many of whom lack the luxury of choice. Boston deserves homes that are not only affordable—but livable.
James Lee
Charlestown, MA