On the corner of tree-lined Walker and Shepard Streets, a stone's throw from the grassy Radcliffe quad, sit the buildings Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles refers to as the "least attractive" of all Harvard undergraduate housing.

With peeling paint and 1950s-style architecture, the buildings the buildings--with their entryways named for former Radcliffe President Wilbur K. Jordan--stick out among the more traditional homes of the tony Cambridge neighborhood.

When they were built, the Jordans were intended to be homes to Radcliffe girls who wanted to save money and learn some domestic skills.

"Pink icings, caramel sauces, hot coffee and tea sandwiches are meticulously prepared by potential Phi Beta Kappas and budding medieval historians," reads an article about activities in the Jordans from the Radcliffe News in 1961. Today, students focus more on their scholarship and less on their cupcakes and have little time for cooking and cleaning.

The University--which took possession of the buildings from Radcliffe with last year's merger--is well aware of the problems with the Jordans.

But due to Cambridge city politics, disagreement over the way the buildings can or should be used and the several other multimillion-dollar construction projects which teh University is already juggling, the fate of these ill-suited buildings remains up in the air.

The Rise and Fall of the Co-op

Built by Radcliffe in 1959, the Jordan buildings were intended to provide an alternative to Harvard's traditional House system--cooperative living space where students could live together and cook for themselves.

But interest in cooperative housing has been drying up, as privacy-seeking students covet singles and private spaces.

By 1985, the Jordans could no longer be filled through the co-op application process, and the College began to use them as overflow housing for the quad Houses.

"As interest in that kind of system evaporated over time, we have gradually been converting them to regular housing," says Associate Dean of Harvard College for Human Resources and the House System Thomas A. Dingman '67.

When Radcliffe officially owned the buildings, Harvard College was in a bind--any renovations to "quad properties" had to be approved by a recalcitrant Radcliffe.

But Harvard gained legal ownership of the quad buildings, including the Jordans, as part of last year's merger deal between the Harvard and Radcliffe. With ownership of the Jordans secured, Harvard now has greater freedom to determine their fate and no longer has to ask Radcliffe's permission to spend funds on renovating and improving Quad buildings.

Bursting at the Seams

And full ownership of the building couldn't have come at a better time.

With House space concerns already forcing some students into three of Harvard's overflow structures, the College needs all the room it can get to house undergraduates. "The Jordans are at the top of our list for facility improvement in Pforzheimer House," Pforzheimer Masters James J. and M. Suzanne McCarthy write in an e-mail message.

Other masters are equally adamant that the Jordans be put to better use"Harvard should give some thought to doing something to make the Jordans more coherent," Ware says. "It's a funny-looking building that really needs an architectural strategy.

"Ware, who refers to Harvard's current housing situation as "very tight," favors removing the large kitchens in each building and converting the first floors--now almost entirely taken up by kitchens and common rooms--into suites and bedrooms. "If you redesigned it well, the Jordans could probably accommodate 80 to 90 people," Ware says--as opposed to the approximately 50 people who live there now. Currier House Master William A. Graham says the Jordans have done their job as overflow housing. But given the Houses' space crunch and the Jordans' wasted space, they may not be doing enough.

"As overflow space in the face of the lamentable overcrowding that all Houses in the College have to endure, they have served a much needed stopgap purpose at least," Graham writes in an e-mail message. "Of course, few of us want the need for such stopgap measures to continue.

"Others, including Dingman, have suggested that the buildings--if nicely renovated--could be attractive senior housing.

But senior housing may not be the best plan for the House community, some quad masters say.

Especially after randomization, they argue rising sophomores and juniors need the seniors to show them the ways of the House and make incoming students feel at home.

"I've never been a fan of having the seniors be separated from the rest of the house," Ware says. "The seniors are the leaders of the House community. I don't think that's a good direction for us to go in."

No Strings Attached?

But while FAS' ownership provides new opportunities, the original terms of the buildings' gift may make it hard for Harvard to renovate the Jordans.

The money for the original Jordan buildings was given to Radcliffe in the late 1950s and early 1960s in a series of gifts by Susan M. Hilles--the same donor who gave the funds for Hilles Library. Hilles gave several donations of $100,000 to Radcliffe "for cooperative housing" over the course of a few years, until the College had enough money to start construction.

But Harvard and Radcliffe disagree over whether the original "cooperative housing" stipulation would prevent dramatic renovations to the buildings. When asked about the Jordans, Radcliffe officials suggest that the terms of the gift may make building renovations that would eliminate common rooms and kitchens might be impermissible.

"The college is obligated to use the gift in accordance with the terms on which it was given," says former Radcliffe president Linda S. Wilson.

And sitting Radcliffe officials agree.

"The buildings belong to FAS, but they were built with a purpose," says Radcliffe Dean for Administration A. Keene Metzger. "We need to be sure that we honor the terms of the initial gift...unless there are other extenuating circumstances.

"But Knowles says donors would surely wish that their gifts be "adapted to today's circumstances"--in this case, by recognizing that few undergraduates nowadays are interested in cooperative living.

"Times have changed, and I know of no record saying that the Jordans should be co-ops forever," Knowles writes in an e-mail message. "Our goal must be to make them as useful and attractive for student housing as we reasonably can."

"The needs of the institution change, of course, and it's relatively rare...that a building remains for its stated single purpose, in perpetuity," Knowles adds.

Dingman says that given the College's present needs, renovating the Jordans is the only feasible solution.

"Whenever someone gives something with a stated purpose you want to honor that," Dingman says. "But we are really just too crowded in our regular housing options.

"Cambridge City ordinances also limit what Harvard can do with the buildings, making a smaller renovation easiest project.

Today, as the University is locked in zoning battles with the city over projects like the Knafel Center, a large-scale change involving taking down the old buildings seems unlikely. The University, after all, has no guarantee that it would gain permission to build anything in its place.

"The Jordans are definitely a potential asset," says Cabot House Master James H. Ware, "but it is unlikely that we could tear them down completely given the present state in Cambridge."

Last in the Pecking Order?

Dingman says that with the proper coaxing, FAS may be able to get renovating the Jordans on its schedule in the near future. "Perhaps we can consult broadly enough that we might be able to get the buildings on a list of projects for next summer," Dingman says. "But it's a question of how we can do all of these projects at once.

"Due to overcrowding, appearance and functionality, quad masters and Housing officials have their own reasons for putting the Jordans high on the list and are optimistic about the outcome.

"We are now engaging in a process with the Dean's planning personnel that we are confident will result in the best outcome for this House," the McCarthys write.

But some administrators are less optimistic. With the many other projects that the FAS has on its plate--including the Knafel Center, an addition to the Science Center and a Physical Sciences building--Harvard may not get around to the Jordans for a few years. "There are lots of multimillion dollar projects in the FAS," Knowles says. "I'm afraid I don't know exactly where the planning is on the Jordans at this point.

"No one seems to be quite sure when renovations might actually begin, but most estimates place them three to five years down the road.

"We will have to work hard to convince the College leadership that this is a priority," Ware says. "It has been between three and five years since we began the discussions about the renovations to the quad's driveway and that probably won't start until next summer."

And conflicting interpretations of the terms of the original gift and differing plans for the buildings will slow the process as well.

"We want to do this collaboratively," Dingman says. "It would be foolish for us to storm ahead and create something that nobody wants to call home."