Report on Housing Gives Five Options

After discussion throughout the summer, a study group composed of Presidents Bok and Horner and five deans of the Faculty has proposed in a report released yesterday five options for revamping the House system.

The five options are:

ILeaving the House system as it is but renovating the Quad;

IPutting all Freshmen at the Quad and converting the Yard into three or possibly four Houses:

IInstituting the "1-1-2" system by housing all Freshmen at the Quad, Sophomores in the Yard and Juniors and Seniors in the River Houses, and

IConverting the Houses and the Yard into 16 four-year Houses.

Housing Problems

Before attempting to resolve the housing problem, the report states that the Faculty must decide whether it wants to "maintain the House system with a predominance of three-year Houses or to institute a new program in which the Freshmen and Sophomores are housed separately."

However, the report continues, in view of the possible educational impact the Summer Study Group did not feel ready to make this decision until the educational issues are further studied.

The five options recommended by the summer study group probably will be debated this fall by the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life.

The only immediate steps the report recommends is to "upgrade the Quad" with "the minimal refurbishment of North and South House" required if they are to be used just by freshman, and to begin the building of athletic facilities on Observatory Hill near the Quad "as soon as possible."

These renovations will cost $655,000 according to the report. If North and South Houses are to be used as upperclass houses the renovation costs will be ap- proximately $2 million, the report states.

The report also asks that a preliminary study of the 1-1-2 plan begin immediately by the Task Force on Undergraduate Education, CHUL and the Committee on Undergraduate Education.

The study should be completed by January 1976, the report suggests so that an "assessment can be made of the probable direction that future development of the housing system will take," and on whether 1-1-2 is a viable plan.

Dean Whitlock, who participated in the study group this summer, said last night that the fifth proposal of creating 16 fouryear Houses, though possibly desirable, "is not being given serious consideration at this time" because the cost of changes needed for the plan will be around $20 million.

It would also require admitting fewer students to the college, and building masters' residences, dining rooms, and libraries "in order to equalize the 16 Houses," he said. The report cites the option as the one with the most potential educational impact.

The fourth option, the "1-1-2" system, has caused the greatest concern throughout the Faculty, Whitlock said, because some people feel it will cause tremendous changes.

The plan would place all freshmen in the Quad and group all sophomores in the Yard according to concentration in oder to increase contact with their department. Only juniors and seniors would live in the Houses.

The report states that this proposal "is the least costly and thus potentially makes resources available for improvement of undergraduate education.