Home Improvement

As part of the College’s preparations to “renew” its 12 upperclass Houses, the House Program Planning Committee—including student representatives—recently ventured out of the Harvard bubble in search of sage wisdom from Yale and Princeton. This trip, along with the distribution of a student survey and the creation of the HPPC in the first place, deserves praise, since such actions demonstrate the administration’s interest in obtaining some level of student input during the House renewal process.

Yale and Princeton both embarked on large-scale construction and reconstruction projects in the recent past, and Harvard planners in HPPC were clearly wise to learn from their peer institutions’ experiences.

As important, however, was the administrations’ decision to send students to Yale and Princeton as part of the team. Including these student members in HPPC, to serve alongside faculty, House masters, administrators, and planners from the Allston Development Group1, is a positive step towards ensuring that student recommendations are given proper weight. Since the 15-year reconstruction process—estimated to cost $1 billion—will be the largest of such renovations to date, it only seems fit that such permanent changes reflect the concerns of the buildings’ inhabitants.

Additionally, Dean of the College Evelynn M. Hammonds e-mailed a comprehensive survey to students last week, requesting their input on everything from House library usage to rehearsal space availability, to sophomore advising, in order to gauge student needs before renovations begin. We hope that suggestions made on this survey will figure prominently in the plans that the College eventually adopts.

As the HPPC and College administration begin to create concrete plans for House renewal, we hope that they address a number of specific residential concerns facing the student body.

“Gutting” of the upperclass houses will provide ample opportunities for large-scale structural improvements. In light of this, planners should consider adding and expanding communal spaces within each House. Currently, many lack sufficient locations where students can gather for events, performances, or simple leisure time, and the absence of such spaces has a very real effect on the social choices students make.

Likewise, eliminating vertical entryways in favor of horizontal hallways should be a priority in the renewal process. This new setup would be far more conducive to community building, since residents would not have to climb stairs in order to meet their neighbors. Currently, many Harvard students do not know the names—or even the faces—of people living only a few feet away from them. This anonymity presents security issues as well as hindering community building, and could easily be avoided with horizontal hallways.

Finally, as any Dunster resident can attest, walk-through suites often lead to highly inconvenient living arrangements. Those guiding the renovations should work to eliminate such set-ups in favor of other options, providing a variety of suite choices from which students can select.

While the College’s efforts towards student involvement in the recommendation process certainly shows promise, what matters most is that these suggestions are sincerely considered, and that viable ones actually come to fruition. Thus far, the administration’s inclusion of students seems laudable, but ultimately success can only be measured once they deliver the package.