DEATH OF A GARDEN

To the Editors of The Crimson:

In bulldozing the house at 21 Sacramento Street Harvard destroyed, not only a building and a garden, but part of the community goodwill the University claims it wishes to build. Harvard states this was not meant as retaliation, but how else can the Agassiz Community interpret the timing, the failure to notify the community in advance, and the brutal nature of the razing which left as an eyesore what was the most attractive garden in the area. The blackberry bushes, the raspberry bushes, the grape vines, the flowering vines, the pear tree--all have been flattened in an apparent scorched earth approach community relations and urban planning.

The Community notified the University six months in advance of its plans to attempt to down zone the two blocks between Garfield Street and Wendell Street. Only at the eleventh hour did the University say it opposed our efforts. Furthermore, even in going against their position, the Community indicated its willingness to work with the University when it was prepared to develop the Sacramento Field area. On the other hand, we were told by the University that it had considered razing the house at 21 Sacramento Street since March but would not do so without discussion with the Community and planning for an alternate use. Why then did they send in the bulldozer without notification or discussion at this time when, as Mr. Moulton says, the University has no immediate plans for the site? Why did Harvard take out the demolition permit late on Tuesday and destroy the house early on Wednesday if not to prevent Community action? The University knew that the Community, the Planning Board and the Historical Society all wished to save that wonderful old house. And why flatten the garden? When the University razed the building at 11 Sacramento Street it at least left a few trees standing. Now the block looks like a bruised fighter who has lost his front teeth. Could the University have an interest in reducing the attractiveness as a place to live and in lowering property values of an area in which it plans to build?

Does Harvard wish to cooperate with the Community in planning the future or does it wish to dictate to the Community and punish us when in its eyes we misbehave? When one sees Harvard's bulldozer knocking over an old house, one can only be struck by the frailty and impermanence of our physical surroundings and our society. Sincerely,   Millard Long