News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
New government regulations may prevent construction of the controversial Varsity Club. Late last month the National Production Authority banned the erection of any new buildings intended for "amusement, recreational, or entertainment purposes."
Vice-President Reynolds said yesterday the ruling "may well prevent the building of the new Varsity Club." He added that the University might have to consult with its lawyers and might have to ask for a government ruling.
Reynolds said that the mater had not yet come before him officially. This probably means that the Corporation has not yet given final approval to the project which was first publicly announced last spring. No important Corporation action is likely while President Conant remains away from the University.
No Clubs Allowed
Specifically prohibited in the Washington ruling were lodge halls and recreational clubs of any kinds. The new Varsity Club, to be built in front of Lowell House, is scheduled to contain a dining hall, a game room, and a snack bar.
With no educational functions served by the building, it may well come under the prohibited section, several University officials agreed yesterday.
At the same time Reynolds said that he did not expect the new science, General Education, or Business School buildings to be affected by the provisions of the new regulations.
Plan Caused Dispute
A great deal of controversy has surrounded the proposed building of the Varsity Club. Money to pay for the structure is scheduled to come from the unrestricted bequest of the late Allston Burr '89.
Supporters of the proposed building have said that Burr, who gave the money for the original Varsity Club, had shown interest before his death in the idea of constructing a new one. The University, they claim, has a moral obligation, and such a project might bolster athletics here.
Opponents of the plan feel that the money could be used better elsewhere for things like scholarships. They emphasize that the money was left unrestricted.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.