“I’m at a loss to understand the objections,” wrote Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles in an e-mail. “If I were a neighbor, I’d be petitioning Harvard please to build a tunnel and thus improve my neighborhood.”
But at hearing after hearing over the past two months, Cambridge residents have made it abundantly clear that they disagree. And rather than restrict their objections to the tunnel alone, residents have attacked the project as a whole and Harvard expansion in general.
“I see no public benefit in this [project],” said Cambridge Street resident Betty Collins at a hearing early last month. “We see it as increasing truck traffic and noise.”
Residents in the Mid-Cambridge neighborhood put the tunnel question to a vote when they met in late January. The results were no different from the long opposition to the planned center by Members of the Mid-Cambridge Neighborhood Association (MCNA)—all but two opposed the tunnel.
The results were similar when they took an impromptu vote on the center as a whole—the 40 residents in attendance were unanimously opposed to CGIS.
While the neighborhood group has no official authority, it has the ear of the city officials who stand between Harvard and its tunnel. Three city councillors came to watch the January proceedings, which MCNA widely avertised as one that would deliver a verdict on the tunnel.
The neighborhood group will continue to oppose the tunnel by sending letters to members of the city planning board and city councillors, says MCNA President John Pitkin, who has long led opposition to Harvard’s government center.
“I certainly expect it to have an impact on the city council,” Pitkin says.
To pass the city council, six of the nine councillors must vote in favor of the plan. But a majority of the councillors, including Mayor Michael A. Sullivan, have already said they intend to vote against it.
Although councillors say that the planning board’s recommendation will weigh in their decision, many say that neighborhood opposition will influence their votes at least as heavily.
“My fundamental concern is that the MCNA is so opposed to the project altogether, and particularly the tunnel,” said Councillor Henrietta Davis. “I won’t ignore what [the planning board members] have to say, but at this time it seems like the neighborhood’s objections weigh more heavily for me.”
Plan B?
Given the city council opposition, the outcome on the tunnel question remains far from certain. But Harvard officials say they have no back-up plan in case the tunnel is voted down.
“There are no hidden alternatives,” Knowles said.
Harvard officials maintain the project will go forward with or without a tunnel. But at a minimum, the University would have to “reconsider” its plans for CGIS if the tunnel were rejected, said Mary H. Power, Harvard’s senior director of community relations.
Without knowing what Harvard would build without an underground passageway, city residents—and even city councillors—have had to resort to speculation. Perhaps the University would redesign the buildings and make them taller to compensate for having less space underground, some speculate. Others say they still hope Harvard will abandon the project altogether.
If the University laid out its options, Pitkin said, the neighborhood group could make a more informed decision.
“Then people could say, ‘We have plan A that has a tunnel and plan B with taller buildings,’” he said. “It’s not clear what the alternative is. It’s just not clear.”
—Staff writer Lauren R. Dorgan can be reached at dorgan@fas.harvard.edu.