In a far-away corner of fair Harvard sits a charming building named Wolbach. What might have been a wasteland of culture in the Quad is saved by this graceful residence of Pforzheimer House. With wooden floors, singles and most importantly kitchens, the Wolbach "apartments" are sweet compensation for Quadlings disgruntled with modern-style housing and their distance from the center of campus.

Yet last week Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles announced that in an effort to create more housing space for students, Wolbach will soon be "renovated." Associate Dean of the College Thomas A. Dingman '67 confirmed this report March 19, saying that during the summer of 2002 the kitchens of Wolbach will be knocked out and that extra bedrooms will be added in their place. Dingman explained that the College is dissatisfied with the high cost of the kitchens' maintenance. The College also must find space for 118 students who are unaccounted for under the current housing scheme due to increasing class size.

"Renovations"? Knowles' plan for Wolbach is a wolf masquerading in sheep's clothing. The proposed renovations would likely strip Wolbach of much of its comfort and charm. Many of Wolbach's rooms are already subdivided; partitions have been erected over the years to squeeze extra singles out of the suites' common-room space. Further partitioning would only leave the rooms cramped and awkwardly arranged. Furthermore, the kitchen spaces are long and narrow and do not naturally lend themselves to bedroom conversion. They cannot be removed from the building without seriously damaging Wolbach's appealing character. The best way to alleviate overcrowding is to find more space for students, not to repartition rooms and eliminate the only rooms not yet overcrowded.

Where could the College find such space? A number of other options exist: reducing the number of resident tutors, downsizing the scholars-in-residence program, renovating Jordan, expanding DeWolfe and Claverley housing and building a thirteenth House.

Reducing the number of resident tutors and scholars in residence would be an easy and efficient way to free up more space for students. The resident tutors have large suites, and subtracting as few as two per house might open up enough rooms to accommodate the roomless students. Many tutors do play important roles in students' lives, and it is important to have at least one tutor per House representing each major concentration area. But there are some tutors who contribute only marginally to their students' House experience, and it is not unreasonable to think that each House could do without one or two of its tutors.

Scholars in residence generally contribute even less to House life. Preoccupied with their academic interests, many occupy valuable housing space while rarely conversing with undergraduates. Although we do value the integration of scholars into our communities, their number could certainly be decreased without disabling the program. In fact, by increasing the competitiveness of such spots, the College could insure that those scholars whom it does select will have an enthusiastic commitment to student life.

If the population of the Houses cannot be reduced, the solution is then to increase the available space. The dilapidated Jordan complex, which serves as overflow housing for Pforzheimer and Cabot Houses, should be renovated so that the quality of its housing will be comparable to the rest of the College's living spaces. There are currently several unused rooms in Jordan simply because it is viewed as so unattractive. Renovations of Jordan would provide for full use of its housing space. Furthermore, another floor could easily be added. The students slated to be assigned to the new, cramped Wolbach would probably prove much happier in a renovated and expanded Jordan.

Another option would be to open up more space for students in the overflow River housing of the DeWolfe and Claverley complexes. Much of this space is currently occupied by faculty. Yet Faculty have access to cars and can easily live off-campus--undergraduates cannot. It makes more sense for this prime campus space to be occupied by students and to assign faculty to subsidized housing more removed from the heart of Harvard. Converting these buildings into spaces wholly devoted to student living and folding them into the existing House system would also end their status as ambiguous halfway houses, neither House nor apartment. All Harvard students have a right to be well-integrated into House life, but the occupants of DeWolfe and Claverley have been deprived of the sense of community which comes from living in an official House building.

The last and arguably the best option is to build a 13th House. Many Houses are so large that few residents know everyone in their own year, let alone in the whole House. House community could be greatly strengthened by decreasing the populations of the largest Houses and assigning 20 extra students, as well as the 118 "overcrowding" students, to a new House. A 13th House would ensure that no Harvard student misses the strong House spirit and adequate room space that contribute to a healthy and fulfilling college life.

We recognize that the land for such a House would be extremely scarce. Indeed, the shortage of land is the greatest single barrier to the construction of a new House. But we are confident that a University that can build the Knafel Center can work to find the necessary real estate.

The cost of these measures--aside from the construction of a new House--would not be exorbitant, especially if a number of them are used in combination. And each is a more elegant solution for the long term than knocking down Wolbach's walls.