An Unfair Characterization

To the Editors of The Crimson:

I am perplexed by the statements attributed to several Harvard officials in your story of March 2 concerning the activities of the Cambridge Historical Commission.

The thrust of the story seems to be that an irrational local body, the Cambridge Historical Commission, threatens to unreasonably inflict additional restrictions on Harvard's ability to dispose as it pleases with its property, historic or otherwise. Specifically, the officials quoted are concerned that the Commission may week to control the interiors of Harvard's buildings, and the Commission's concerns are characterized as "quibbling," "irrelevant," "unrealistic," and "troublesome," and that "overregulation" and "abuse of process" may accompany efforts at preservation. I think they should know better.

The community's concerns about preservation at Harvard go back many years. The Historical Commission, a municipal agency, was established over twenty years ago in part to administer an historic district that included, with Harvard's consent, a portion of the Old Yard. Over the years that district has been expanded, but never over the objections of the University. The Commission has reviewed many Harvard proposals for new construction and alterations in the district, and while we may have occasionally debated the color of shutters we have more than served to prevent or modify ill-considered schemes that might best be left undescribed. The Supreme Court has found that a municipality can regulate its appearance through the preservation of historic structures as effectively as it can its public health through the sanitary and zoning codes, and Cambridge has determined to do that.

The immediate issue raised in the article is the proposed amendment of state law regulating historic district commissions to allow communities to protect the interiors of public buildings. As originally drafted, Harvard might have been affected, but the University made its concerns known last summer and the draft bill was amended to its present form. Harvard buildings do not qualify as public, and the University's General Counsel would probably terminate with extreme prejudice any Harvard official who suggested that they were. This objection to a proposed amendment to state law that must first be enacted and then implemented by a local body--but that doesn't apply in the first peace--seems obscurely taken, and it is different to imagine why the issue has been brought to The Crimson when all involved thought it settled months ago.

A second issue raised in the article is that of Harvard's proposed demolition of 10 Mount Auburn Street. A study conducted by Harvard and the Commission is cited as evidence that building is "without historical significance." This is a contradiction of the facts. The study referred to was carried our to identify buildings eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and did not find any building to be without significance; 10 Mount Auburn was simply found not to he eligible for the Register. Under local demolition procedures, demolition of any building over fifty years old requires review by the Historical Commission. If the staff finds the building architecturally significant or important, in the context of its neighborhood, a public hearing can be held, the demolition delayed up to six months, and, if sufficient interest develops, the City Council may designate the building a protected landmark. One function of this procedure is to allow public input in development decisions and prevent unanticipated destruction of significant building. This is a public process that Harvard must participate in, and it is in no way to be confused with the purposes of the National Register study.

Finally, there is the supposed frivolity of the Commission's deliberations. With one exception, none of the officials quoted have, to my knowledge, attended a Commission meeting, much less appeared on behalf of the University. I invite them to do so on April 4 when the Commission considers Harvard's application for a permit to demolish 10 Mount Auburn Street. Charles M. Sullivan   Executive Director   Cambridge Historical Commission