When the state's plan for a mammoth 11-story highway interchange--the infamous "Scheme Z"--surfaced more than two years ago, Cambridge pundits and curmudgeons for once could agree. They hated it.

Cambridge civic associations, private citizens and city government all had something to say about the high-profile project. The proposed I-90/Route I interchange over the Charles River, part of the state's $5 billion blueprint for a new central artery highway, had to go.

True, a few union members and advocates backed the project, worried that conflict over Scheme Z would throw a wrench into the entire Central Artery project, which the state's Department of Transportation has said will create 15,000 jobs. But proponents were clearly the silent minority.

Opponents claimed that Z would turn into an environmental blight and a gigantic eyesore on 70 acres of East Cambridge land. Traffic, pollution and noise, they said, would be the result.

Daniel E. Geer, co-chair of Cambridge Citizens for Liveable Neighborhoods, called Scheme Z "a loop-de-loop, above-ground monstrosity." "Bury Scheme Z" graffitti appeared on signs in subway trains which advertised the jobs and cash flow created by the Central Artery. And Elizabeth Epstein of the city's Conservation in Commission said she had "good reason to believe that there are better alternatives."

Last March, the city of Cambridge and the Charles River Watershed Association, a citizens' environmental advocacy group, announced their intention to sue the state to block Scheme Z.

Councillor Edward N. Cyr at the time voiced the prevailing sentiment when he said that although the state's portion of the interstate highway system had become direly outmoded, Z was "just not a good long-term solution."

For once, it looks like the little guys will get their way.

In April, after months of discussion and meetings, the blue-ribbon committee convened by the state specifically to improve the design of the crossing over the Charles gave the definitive nix to the $47 million Scheme Z. And at its most recent meeting last week, the group agreed to focus its attention on a bridge design approximately half the size of Z.

The preferred alternative, "Committee Improvement Package 5," is one-half the width of Z and 35 feet lower, and has four fewer ramps and five fewer river piers.

According to Cambridge architect Hugh A. Russell '64, one of the city's voices on the bridge committee, "there've been enormous improvements."

"It's very clear that everything that's being studied now is enormously superior to Scheme Z," Russell says.

But the controversy remains unresolved.

The new plan, which Cambridge's bridge watchers strongly back, comes with a hefty $840 million price tag--almost twice the twice the price of Scheme Z. And when the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) agreed last month to fund 90 percent of the Central Artery project, it did not necessarily agree to foot a higher bill for an improved bridge.

Although the Highway Administration indicated its support for the work of the committee, the plans it approved included blueprints for the old Scheme Z. So no one is quite sure whether the government will agree to pay. If it doesn't, the state could get stuck with a bill it can't afford.