Classy Digs

As it stands now, Harvard housing leaves quite a bit to be desired. From the barren wasteland of Cabot House to the “quaint” walkthrough triples of Dunster, many students currently preparing for their housing lotteries are faced with less than ideal options. In recent years, Harvard has done little to combat this problem, even as our peer institutions have embarked on ambitious housing projects such as Princeton’s construction of the $100 million Whitman College and Yale’s extensive renovation of its 12 residential colleges.

But hope is on the way. Last week, University Hall announced that Harvard would embark on a $1 billion, 15-year renovation of its undergraduate living space, the largest such project in its history. The endeavor will involve a complete overhaul of the interior of each of the 12 houses while preserving their historically significant facades, and will be guided by a joint student-faculty committee.

We applaud the University’s approval of this expensive but much-needed project, which will have a profound impact on the experience of Harvard’s students. These renovations have the potential to combat many of the largest deficiencies currently plaguing the student body. In particular, the University should focus on addressing the layout of bedrooms, structural updates, and social space.

Living conditions stand to improve greatly if the renovation project aims to better utilize space through minimizing the number of walkthroughs, providing a more diverse assortment of suites from which to choose. Such changes to the layout will not only increase student privacy, but will also be beneficial in terms of improving handicap accessibility—something that the current River houses, which lack elevators, struggle to accommodate.

In addition, it seems that the idiosyncratic Harvardian quirk of vertical entryways remains, despite the fact that it has outlived its usefulness in fostering social unity. While vertical entryways may be a characteristic feature of Harvard’s dorms, they should be scrapped in favor of more conventional horizontal hallways, which provide better opportunities for socializing among neighbors.

Communal spaces also have large potential for improvement. The renovation project should attempt to create more large spaces conducive to social gatherings in the mold of the Currier Treehouse, thereby addressing the unfortunate lack of social space outside of Mt. Auburn St. mansions. Such progress should not only take place above ground, but also in House basements, which can be revamped so that each has a fully equipped kitchen, gym, social space, and distinctive, House-specific features such as dance studios, dark rooms, or rock-climbing walls.

In addition, the University must remain cognizant of the trauma that a construction project will have on current House residents. As such, nearby swing space should be constructed to house students displaced by construction—space that could likely be converted into graduate student housing later.

While long-term concerns occupy the foreground of the University’s housing concerns, the short term needs of students should not be forgotten. Since the renovation project will likely not be completed for many years, the immediate problems facing house residents such as overcrowding, sewage leakage, heating, and ventilation cannot be ignored.

Fortunately, it seems that the administration is already mindful of many of these concerns. We hope that they continue to listen to student input, and take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity to transform student life at Harvard.