A Cowperthwaite Cacophony

For Harvard, the next decade will be characterized by growth and expansion. As development in Allston continues to stir controversy throughout the community, Harvards expansion has already begun elsewhere. As it grows, Harvard must become willing to consult affected undergraduates; after all, in President Summers inaugural address he called Harvard College the very heart of the University, and the interests and concerns thereof should never be ignored when the quality of undergraduate life is at stake.

Among the many capital projects in which Harvard is presently engaged is the construction of new graduate housing on Cowperthwaite Street adjacent to the Leverett Towers, Dunster House, and Mather Low-rise. This project involves the erection of a six-story building 30 feet east of Leveretts G Tower, virtually eliminating the green space between Cowperthwaite and Grant Streets (known informally as Dog Walk Alley).

Full information about this project was not directly presented to the masters, tutors, and students in the affected Houses until early in 2005, by which time an agreement had been signed with the city. Upon hearing the announcement, many residents of Dunster, Mather, and Leverett were justifiably outraged. In addition to having objections to many neighborhood changes, students were offended at the processone that expressly excluded them from any input.

The main problem centers on how Harvard prioritizes the groups with which it discusses changes to its campus. The University worked with local residents and made concessions to them, their approval being requisite for obtaining a permit from the City of Cambridge. On the other hand, the groups of people who will be most affected by this development were neither consulted nor informedsimply because their approval was not needed. Undergraduates, as well as the other members of the Harvard residential community, deserve to be informed of the changes that will affect their homes.

In addition to deficiencies in Harvards approach to this project, the design of the proposed building itself has shortcomings. According to local residents who were involved in the negotiations with the University, the original plan called for building exclusively on the former parking lot between Grant and Cowperthwaite Streets and not the green space, and the building was not originally planned to be as tall as six stories. The present plan, however, calls for both. The current scheme poses serious risks to the safety and quality of life of local residents. Due to the narrowness of the proposed alleyway between Leverett Towers and the new building (used by pedestrians night and day), safety must be a paramount concern. Further, one must consider the endangerment of the entire neighborhoods quality of life. There will be a decrease in natural light from the shadow cast by the new dormitory, and Leverett residents will encounter a newfound lack of privacy by having neighbors with windows only a few yards away from those on the east side of G Tower.

The buildings design could have been altered to preserve the now-cherished green space and to expand the pathway by moving the new structure an additional 30 feet away from Leverett. Harvard could have not only improved the project but also demonstrated an earnest commitment toward listening to and valuing the interests of its undergraduates. The opportunity for such reforms having now elapsed, it is even more imperative that the University and community work to mitigate any negative consequences of this building, both during and after construction.

Aside from concerns about the design of the building and the process by which it arrived, members of the community also share specific worries about the two-and-a-half-year construction process. During this time, students health and safety will be at risk in several ways. Sleep schedules will be disturbed by early-morning construction, despite the Universitys purported interest in encouraging students to get adequate and consistent sleep. Loud noise at 8 a.m. will jeopardize the mental health of countless students. Moreover, dust from the construction site will give the neighborhood a cloud of hazardous air. And with the long-term closure of the path beside the Leverett Towers, students from Dunster and Mather, along with dog-walkers and local schoolchildren, will be forced to walk farther along the streets, including Memorial Drive, posing safety worries for all.

Of course, we understand the need for expansion and some of the inconveniences that come with it, and we recognize that the University is right to pursue its goal of housing 50 percent of its graduate students. But such growth must be achieved in a manner consistent with what President Summers in his inaugural address called the Universitys obligations to members of our campus community and to the communities in which we reside.

With the completion of other expansion projects, Harvard has shown its ability to build affiliate housing without adversely affecting the lives of the community. If such an approach can be incorporated into the Cowperthwaite Street project, this chapter in Harvards growth can be a positive one for members of the graduate and undergraduate communities alike. Otherwise, we are forced to question the administrations commitment to the quality of undergraduate residential life, attention to the needs of the residential community, and ability to expand in a manner that will benefit not only the University but the entire Harvard community.

Matthew R. Greenfield 08 is a government concentrator in Mather House. Erinn M.M. Wattie 06 is a comparative study of religion concentrator in Dunster House. Lauren P.S. Epstein 07 is a government concentrator in Leverett House.