{shortcode-7b286eecd8a1b518461b46977306f1466ea39ac6}

Tourists’ presence in Harvard Yard has received much attention, and the case for closing the Yard to only Harvard affiliates has been well argued.

But the Yard is not the only center of Harvard College’s residential life that our administrators have misguidedly left open to the public.

As a Quincy House resident, I cannot help but notice that our beloved Quincy courtyard is the single house courtyard of the nine river houses open to the public.

Adams, Dunster, Eliot, Kirkland, Leverett, Lowell, Mather, and Winthrop all require Harvard ID swipe access for their courtyards. Why doesn’t Quincy?

In the push to convince administrators to adequately protect students and the College’s residential living environment, we must pay attention to all the places where Harvard welcomes tourists — including beyond the Yard.

A House’s courtyard is often a centerpiece of its space and community. Friends see each other in passing through the courtyard, or study, eat, and play outdoors when the weather is pleasant.

A courtyard can be unique to a House too. Eliot, by design, funnels residents into a single entry and through the courtyard, which leads students to see each other frequently; Lowell’s courtyard is known for being a nice, tranquil space with scenic architecture.

Quincy’s is special too, beyond the fact that it is the only courtyard accessible to the public. It is an impressively large, contiguous space between New Quincy and Stone Hall, where students can hang out in good weather. Because Stone Hall has no indoor connection to the dining hall in New Quincy, Quincy residents naturally end up passing each other in the courtyard.

Fundamentally, House courtyards should be places for students to enjoy — not public parks. The general public’s presence harms the sense of community that students should be able to find in residential common spaces.

While I support closing the Yard to the public, I do realize that such a closure would present a logistical problem given the many high-traffic access points that should remain secure yet accessible to Harvard affiliates, which could make devising a good design for ID swipe gates challenging.

In the effort to secure our residential spaces, it makes more sense to start with low-hanging fruit: Quincy’s courtyard has only one entrance that is unsecured, and this gate could easily accommodate an ID swipe system.

This issue is especially pressing given the recent increase in reports of theft around campus. Some of the thefts involved bicycles or electric scooters, which students often leave on bike racks in courtyards; others involved belongings such as laptops, iPads, and backpacks from dorm rooms or common spaces.

Harvard must do what it can to protect its students from crime. Closing Quincy courtyard is a sensical solution to reduce criminals’ access to dorm rooms, common spaces, bike racks, and student property.

Moreover, the mere act of restricting access to Harvard ID holders gives students a sense of safety and security which cannot be understated.

I look forward to the day Harvard finally does the right thing and closes the Yard and all other residential common spaces. But I also think baby steps — closing Quincy courtyard — are a step in the right direction.

Ian M. Moore ’26, a Crimson Editorial editor, is an Applied Mathematics concentrator in Quincy House