To the editors:

Regarding the editorial “Philistines on the Charles” (Sept. 18), you have been misinformed about the Riverside neighborhood’s opposition to Harvard’s plan for a museum on the site of the Mahoney’s Garden Center. I am a member of the Riverside Study Committee and have been involved with this issue since Harvard first presented its plan to the community.

Harvard’s plan called for a 55-foot tall building. This is the maximum height allowed by state law so close to the river. Harvard never entered into any negotiations about this with the neighborhood. Harvard simply presented its design and never considered any alternative museum designs. The neighborhood would be open to the possibility of a smaller museum, but this apparently is of no interest to Harvard. Your statement that “Harvard should have continued to search for a compromise” implies that Harvard actually did search for a compromise. If you have any evidence of this, I would be interested to see it.

It is unlikely that the museum plan was dropped due to neighborhood opposition. The departures of former University President Neil L. Rudenstine and University Art Museums Director James Cuno have reduced support for art at Harvard. More importantly, the museum required an easement for contruction under a public street, and given the Center for Government and International Studies easement defeat, Harvard realized it was unlikely to get an easment for the museum.

Alec Wysoker ’84

Cambridge, Mass.

Sept. 18, 2002