Ten city planners--including William W. Nash Jr., chairman of Harvard's Department of City and Regional Planning--appealed Friday to Boston Mayor John F. Collins for an overhaul of the North Harvard urban renewal project.

The Boston Redevelopment Authority is planning to raze all the homes of the small community located behind the Business School. The planners said the project is "contrary to the stated principles of the renewal program" and termed it "another case where low and moderate-income families are being forced to leave their homes to permit construction of a luxury apartment building to which few, if any, of the original inhabitants can return."

To replace the current project, the planners recommended the development of a new plan "that would benefit the families presently living on the site." They proposed that most of the occupants be allowed to keep their homes and that the BRA help the community in rehabiltating their houses.

'The Poor Get Homeless'

Residents of the area have vocifer ously opposed the project since its inception, and last winter leaders of the anti-renewal war vowed that they would resist eviction bodily. Anti-renewal signs reading "To Hell with Urban Renewal" and "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Homeless" are posted on many of the homes.

The planners noted that "While the disruptive and occasionally abusive behavior and tactics of the area's residents may not strike us as decorous or pleasant, we do not believe that opposition to their methods is sufficient reason to refuse to enter into serious dialogue with them."

Although "under existing state and federal standards the area qualifies as 'blighted and decadent,'" the planners found "no compelling reason" to demolish the homes and said that "much of the apparent blight is due to superficial neglect and the absence of normal municipal services, such as paved streets and adequate street lighting."

Eviction notices have already been delivered to some of the residents, and their battle is presently regarded as coming to a final, unsuccessful conclusion. However, the planners observed that the area's inhabitants "clearly have a deep attachment to their homes and neighborhood. . .and the prospect of forced displacement appears to present a severe crisis."