Harvard Files Union Motion

The University filed a motion on Wednesday to dismiss local preservationists' complaints about renovations of the Harvard Union's Great Hall.

The complaint was filed in March by members of the Harvard Alumni Architectural Review Committee (HAARC), who have led a three-month crusade against the planned division of the Great Hall.

The University's motion to dismiss asks the court to discard the plaintiffs' claim on the grounds that it is invalid under the law, according to University Attorney Robert B. Donin.

Under court rules, the plaintiffs have 10 days to respond to the motion, Donin said.

If the motion to dismiss is denied, the University must answer the complaint, responding to each claim cited. The matter would then be decided in court.

The Middlesex Superior Court had previously denied the alumni group's request for an injunction postponing construction on the building until the complaint could be heard in court.

HAARC filed a motion for reconsideration on April 11 in an attempt to halt construction until the original complaint could be heard in court.

The committee has certainly not given up, according to H.A. Crosby Forbes'50, vice-chair of HAARC.

"The plaintiffs will oppose Harvard's motion and at the same time file for [the reconsideration of the motion previously dismissed]," said Thomas B. Bracken, the attorney representing HAARC.

HAARC argues that its claims are valid and believes it is legally entitled to the preliminary injunction.

According to Bracken, HAARC has filed the second motion because the group believes "the judge made various errors in reaching the legal conclusion and that [after] further consideration should issue a preliminary injunction."

Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles said, however, that the language of the judge's original ruling was clear.

"Judge Borenstein denial of the request for a preliminary injunction seemed to me unambiguous," Knowles said.

Though the issue continues to be argued in court, workers and contractors have been back at work since April 4, when a temporary restraining order was lifted. This allowed renovations to continued on schedule, said Capital Projects Manager Elizabeth L. Randall.

And Randall said major construction on the Great Hall had already been completed before the University was forced to stop.

"We had already pretty much completed all the demolition relating to the Great Hall except taking off the trusses," Randall said.

Randall said that no major construction has occurred in the Great Hall, besides the removal of ceiling ducts and scaffolding since the order was lifted.

According to the renovation plans, workers will soon remove the roof trusses and will install steel into the Great Hall.

The whole project is expected to be completed in April 1997

Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles said, however, that the language of the judge's original ruling was clear.

"Judge Borenstein denial of the request for a preliminary injunction seemed to me unambiguous," Knowles said.

Though the issue continues to be argued in court, workers and contractors have been back at work since April 4, when a temporary restraining order was lifted. This allowed renovations to continued on schedule, said Capital Projects Manager Elizabeth L. Randall.

And Randall said major construction on the Great Hall had already been completed before the University was forced to stop.

"We had already pretty much completed all the demolition relating to the Great Hall except taking off the trusses," Randall said.

Randall said that no major construction has occurred in the Great Hall, besides the removal of ceiling ducts and scaffolding since the order was lifted.

According to the renovation plans, workers will soon remove the roof trusses and will install steel into the Great Hall.

The whole project is expected to be completed in April 1997