University College Dublin and the future : a memorandum from a research group of Tuairim, Dublin branch, on the report of the Commission on Accommodation Needs of the constituent colleges of the National University of Ireland : with special reference to

[left page] 46 [heading] U.C.D. and the Future

(f) Six old houses, Nos. 16-21 Charlemont Place, average P.L.V. approx. £23. (Four of these are described as 'Tenements' in Thom's Directory, 1957).

(g) The roadway and paths of Peter's Place itself.

We submit that the disturbance to home and business premises in this area would be minimal. Only nine houses with a total P.L.V. of £227 are involved. The few businesses are of a kind that can readily be accommodated elsewhere.

Until reasonable offers to purchase have been made, it cannot be said that 'compulsary purchase' will be at all necessary. And in any event, should such interests be given priority over the needs of the University?

The cost of acquiring these 4.5 acres should be considerably less than the cost of acquiring block D as considered by the Commission which contemplated the immediate acquisition of the houses on Adelaide Road and Harcourt Terrace.

The remaining property along the Canal stretching towards Charlemont Bridge, to the west of the site of the former railway bridge, is in poor condition and not very valuable. The back gardens of No. 11 Harcourt Terrace also make up a considerable frontage on the Canal. This whole area would be suitable as a site for the Engineering faculty.* Further, the architectural advantages to a site of an area of open water are mannifold--if the Canal be retained.

It may be, however, that evenually the Canal here would be filled in and built on--thus providing the College with still further ground on to which to expand in the area between Charlemont Street Bridge and Leeson Street Bridge.

We note in passing that the adjoining block of property (marked 'C') extending from the former railway lines to Charlemont Street is also in poor condition, and is in fact to be acquired compulsorily by Dublin Corporation for demolition in the very near future. This would make a further 3.6 acres available. The block to the west of Charlemont Street is similarly to be acquired.

[heading]Block 'B2' -- The Harcourt Street Station Site

This block of property covering an area of 4.3 acres (not 3.3 acres as marked on the Commission's site plan -- Attachment IV, referred to above), and formerly the property of C.I.E. was sold, as one lot, but public autcion on 12th June last for a sum of £67,500. It was bought by a firm of estate agents

[line]

* It is a matter of historical interest that, in fact, the Engineering school of the Royal College of Science was originally located on this area, on the site bordering the Canal to the east of Harcourt Terrace, subsequently occupied by the Turraun Peat Works, and at present occupied by the Department of Agriculture's Butter Testing Station, a Garda barracks and the Film Censor's office. It was only after the engineering workshops had been destroyed by fire that they were moved to Merrion Street. [end of left page] [right page] [heading]A Study of Adjacent Sites 47

and may be resold to a suitable bidder. Several parties are said to be interested in its aquisition. Full details of this property and its leases are given in Appendix F to this Memorandum. We will content ourselves here with pointing out that the leases of all the essential sections will have expired at latest by 1970, i.e. by the time the College could have fully developed the Iveagh Gardens and Earlsfort Terrace sites. The area occupied by the Station proper and associated open spaces amounts to 91,000 sq. ft. and immediate possesion of this available. The lease of the vaults underlying the station (approximately 80,100 sq. ft.) expires in 1968, but the tenant could surrender in 1961 (Appendix F).

The lease of Dunlops' holding (52,200 sq. ft.) expires in 1963. The lease of Autoservices' holding at Adelaide Road (21,753 sq. ft.) expires in 1970.

We do not suggest the acquisition of Autoservices' garage on the corner of the block (held on a 99-year lease) as we do not regard it as vital to the development of the area.

Some of these leases may be renewable and the small property ('Lot No. 4') in Hatch Street, is held on a 99-year lease. It is improbable that compulsory purchase would have to be invoked in order to develop the property for university use.

These two blocks--D, as discussed above, and B2, the Station block--constituting together 8.8 acres, and having in addition the amenities of the existing roadways, could be acquired by the College. Taken with Iveagh Gardens, the Terrace site and the University property on St. Stephen's Green, South, the total holding would be 23 acres--enough to satisfy, even according to the Commission's calculations, the present needs of the College, and allowance for a future 20% expansion, and some ground to spare. These properties should be secured forthwith.

[heading]Other Sites

Naturally, we also recommend the acquisition of any other property in the neighbourhood which from time to time becomes available; expecially houses in Harcourt Terrace and Adelaide Road (Block D); or in Earlsfort Terrace and Lr. Hatch Street as far as University Hall; or on the east side of Harcourt Street.

With regard to other blocks of property considered by the Commission for widespread compulsory acquisition, we comment as follows:

(i) Instead of considering the acquisition of the whole of the east side of Harcourt Street and of St. Stephen's Green, South, let us focus our attention on that part of the St. Stephen's Green, South, from the corner of Earlsfort Terrace, No. 65 to No. 87 (the Presbytery of University Church). This property presents a frontage of 735' to the Green. Of this 245' is already in University hands, 160' (Iveagh House and the Passport Office) are controlled by the Government, and 70' (Loretto Hall and the C.B.S.I. Headquarters) can be said to be under ecclesiastical control. There remains only 260' (or 35% of the block) which is privately owned. Therefore, if ever the College did require the whole of this frontage on St. Stephen's Green the only section which might need to be acquired compulsorily would be this 35% of the [end right page]

48 U.C.D. and the Future

whole, the eleven houses (Nos. 67-70 and 72-76). Very few of these are used for business purposes (e.g. two commercial colleges); others are dwelling houses, some being let in flats. These houses include the least significant of all the houses surrounding the Green. If ever this whole block, constituting some 60% of St. Stephen's Green, South, had to be acquired by the College, we submit that the disturbance to domestic and commercial property would be slight compared with the gain to the College, whilst no disturbance to industrial or hotel property would be entailed at all.

(ii) The Commission gave some brief attention to the question of acquiring the whole of the blocks bordered by Earlsfort Terrace, Lr. Leeson Street and Adelaide Road. We consider that this was unrealistic and unnecessary for the College's needs. Much more limited acquisitions would suffice. While the Commission was sitting, Comhluch Siuicre Eireann Teo. acquired a valuable site (approx. 21,000 sq. ft.) stretching from Earlsfort Terrace to Leeson Street. This has been cleared out but not yet built upon. In the triangular block between Earlsfort Terrace, Lr. Leeson Street and Hatch Street two adjoining properties between them occupy more than half of the area-- Alexandra College, with a frontage of 470' on Earlsfort Terrace and the Sacred Heart Convent in Leeson Street. Together these properties cover an area of about 3.4 acres. The Commission might have confined its attention to the possibility of acquiring either or both of these schools, which are inadequately housed, partly in converted dwelling houses.

(iii) Regard might also be paid to the fact that when the new Elm Park hospital is built, St. Vincent's will not require all of its present holdings (approximately 2.7 acres) on St. Stephen's Green, East, and Lower Leeson Street. We understand that the intention is to maintain a private nursing home in the area, but a substantial amount of property should nevertheless be set free. The co-operation of the authorities of St. Vincent's might be sought with a view to their providing on this site the proposed 'Clinical Institute' to be run in conjunction with the Medical school if it be retained at Earlsfort Terrace. The great advantage of such a scheme would be that buildings already exist for it--whereas the Clinical Institute, suggested as a new item for the Stillorgan Road site, has not even been budgeted for.

C. LONG TERM EXPANSION

There remains one further assertion of the Commission in regard to siting, on which we desire to comment. Despite the fact that a complete new College would require only 813,300 sq. ft. gross of floor space (including the provision for 20% expansion beyond present needs) and consequently a site area of only 18.7 acres, the Commission writes as follows (Report, p.32):--

'If the extension to the canal (Block B1 and D) that we contemplated were practicable the College would have at Earlsfort Terrace a total area of about 21 acres. As already stated we entertained the possibilty of finding a solution. Later an examination of the areas of the sites of other Universities and Colleges convinced us that a proper and final solution to the accommodation needs of University College, Dublin, could not be provided for on a site of 21 acres.'

50 U.C.D. and the Future

graduates—so a large increase in student numbers seems improbable. If this space should be required, however, it should not be provided in U. C. D. which is already too large. It could be provided by improving and expanding the Colleges in Cork and Galway, and perhaps by founding new Colleges in other centres such as Limerick.

Of one thing we are certain: U.C.D. should not be allowed to grow into a colossus to the impoverishment of our other university colleges.

For all these reasons then, we submit that there is no need to provide for an expansion of the U.C.D. full-time student body beyond 5,000 and that space for such expansion should never be required or acquired.

(2) Faculty Expansion

It is true that the frontiers of knowledge will continue to expand. It is also true that the contribution that our population and our economy, even when more fully developed, can make to such expansion is limited. We grant that new university departments not yet in existence may be required for U.C.D. and hope that they will, in time, be created. Amongst departments that might be set up or expanded we may include the following: various branches of sociology, public and business administration, managerial training, psychology. A computer laboratory might be established. To the scientific and technological faculties there might be added departments of astronomy (in association with Dunsink Observatory), electronics, radiation chemistry, biophysics and medical physics, anthropology, genetics and other biological specialisations.

In any such schemes for expansion, however, the University would naturally have to be guided by what was economically feasible and by, we would like to hope, what facilities were available elsewhere in the city. Any new department that might be established would be such as could be housed in conventional buildings and laboratories in, if necessary, multi-storeyed blocks. The British universities, which the Commission visited and whose large site areas impressed them so greatly, will be concerned with established and expanding great technological and other departments which are closely linked with the British industrial economy. We will not need great atom-smashing machines for nuclear research (a field already beyond the capacity of any single British university and for which the countries of Western Europe have had to cooperate in such international projects as Euratom or C.E.R.N.), nor need we provide for departments concerned with rocket flight or space exploration.

It is, of course, to be expected that the expansion of the economy and particularly of industry will require increased facilities for advanced technology. Most such facilities could likewise be housed in city blocks. Where this is impossible, the corresponding advanced teaching and reseach could be sited at a distance from the College since they have little to do with undergraduate teaching. Alternatively it could find its expression in the foundation or expansion of institutions other than U.C.D. Even those who disagree with us, and consider that this solution is not ideal, must surely agree that it would be preferable to site a very few now unforseen, highly specialised units some distance from U.C.D. than to remove the whole of the College from the cultural and educational complex to which it belongs. We submit that there

Suggestions Towards a Solution 51

is no need to acquire a campus which would attempt to provide in advance for every possible contingency.

We submit that the Commission was not justified in comparing the areas devoted to British universities with that available to U.C.D. if it remained within the city. It is to be noted that two differently constituted Architectural Advisory Boards, given extensive estates at Stillorgan, prepared two different site plans for a new College, which in each case was confined to some 36 acres and included very large quadrangles. The central open area of the Belgrove plan is about two-thirds the size of St. Stephen's Green.

In general the direct comparison of universities in different centres is seldom justifiable. Each institution is unique in its site, its history, development and local affiliations. A great diversity is to be seen amongst them in buildings, administrative structures, systems of finance, range of faculties, provision for research, and in racial, cultural or other associations. U.C.D. must be viewed in its own particular context. Academic groves and expansive lawns are not really necessary. Some of the world's greatest universities, Paris and Vienna to name but two, flourish in city centres, without such amenities, nor have they attempted to move out in search of them. Their great blocks stand in built-up area and the bustling life of the great cities flows close around their quadrangles.

We submit that, as the whole of the College's accommodation needs, including provision for expansion of student numbers to 5,000, can be more than met on 23 acres and that such expansion as may take place in the more distant future will be confined to subjects that can be housed in conventional buildings which could be acquired or erected from time to time on such sites as become available in the general university area, the College should be required to proceed forthwith with the development of its own sites and the acquisition and development of adjacent sites and should abandon altogether any thoughts of moving the College to the Stillorgan Road area. The move is unnecessary.

VI. SUGGESTIONS TOWARDS A SOLUTION ON PRESENT AND ADJACENT SITES

These suggestions fall in broad outline under four headings, under which progress could be made simultaneously— I Plan II Retain and regroup III Purchase IV Build

We do not intend putting forward any specimen site plans. An expert committee might consider many alternative schemes for the development of the whole area in the vicinity of Earlsfort Terrace. However, we will put forward one scheme as an example of what might be done.

A SAMPLE SCHEME The sample scheme which we outline here assumes that no co-operation or co-ordination is forthcoming, i.e. it provides for U.C.D.'s maximum needs.

52 U.C.D. and the Future

It also assumes that the Government is unwilling to extend the lease to the College of Science Buildings in Merrion Street.

The ultimate result of this scheme would be to site the faculties in three contiguous groups as follows:

1. Engineering (with the Department of Geology) and Architecture--between the Canal and Adelaide Road.

2. Science--between Adelaide Road and Hatch Street.

3. All the remainder--on the Terrace/Gardens site.

The sites that we regard as being available without undue difficulty in these areas (as explained in Section V) extend to 4.5, 4.3 and 13 acres respectively, without the including the existing roadways. In each case the site for the faculties mentioned is more than sufficient for present needs and the 20% expansion for which the Commission has estimated.

1. Plan

Dublin Corporation as the appropriate planning authority should be requested to use its powers under the appropriate acts to reserve areas in the vicinity for future university use.

II. Retain and Regroup

1. Retain, at least for the time being, the Science Buildings in Upper Merrion Street.

2. (a) Evacuate the Engineering faculty and the department of Geology to a new site (see below).

(b) Request the Government to evacuate both the Seed Testing Laboratories of the Department of Agriculture and the State Laboratory from the Science Buildings. The former would be more happily accommodated at any of the agricultural stations of the Department or of An Foras Taluntais, whilst the latter might be sited at Glasnevin in conjunction with the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards.

The space thus set free in Merrion Street would enable the remaining Science departments, Chemistry, Botany and Zoology to meet their present needs and still leave them some room for expansion. It would be a long time before overcrowding again became so bad as to force the removal of a further Science department.

It might be argued that such a redistribution of space in the Science Buildings would be wasteful, if in the long run Merrion Street had to be completely evacuated. This need not be so. Modern methods of building laboratory furniture and fittings in 'units' render such equipment flexible and readily transportable to another place.

3. Evacuate the administration from the Earlsfort Terrace block, thus providing immediately some more teaching space. Rehouse the administration in such property as could be acquired anywhere in the general area. This separation of administration need be only a temporary measure, for as indicated under 'Build' below there is sufficient space available to enable the administration to be included in new building.

Suggestions Towards a Solution 53

III. Purchase

1. The Harcourt Street Station site (4.3 acres).

2. 'The Lawn,' also the C.I.E. property south of Adelaide Road and as much of the adjoining areas as could be obtained with or without compulsory purchase. The total area that is most readily available in this block amouts to 4.5 acres (see Section V)).

3. Any other property in this general area as it becomes available. The site now belonging to Comhlucht Siuicre Eireann Teo, mentioned earlier should be considered.

Immediate action would be necessary in the case of all these properties.

IV. Build

From the point of view of the relief of overcrowding, immediate acion under this heading is also imperative.

1. Buildings for the faculty of Engineering (together with Geology) and the faculty of Architecture could be erected in the area between the Canal and Adelaide Road. It is important to realise that the erection of buildings here need not necessarily await the acquisition of the whole 4.5 acres mentioned in Section V,-- 'The Lawn' and the adjoining field are open ground on which operations might commence immediately. Provision would have to be made elsewhere for the needs of the Dental Hospital which has but lately acquired 'The Lawn'.

Long term expansion on this site would proceed by gradual acquisition of neighbouring property as it comes on the market. The total area that might eventually be acquired in this block, bounded by Adelaide Road, Harcourt Terrace, Charlemont Place and Charlemont Street, is 13.3 acres.

Those who would object to the erection of new university buildings behind the back gardens of existing houses would do well to remember that the College of Science was erected on just such a site, and operated for many years before the Georgian terrace in Merrion Street was eventually demolished to make way for the wings of the block, which now house Government offices.

2. In this 'sample scheme' the Station site would be reserved for a later phase and would eveentually provide a site for new Science buildings. Meanwhile the departments of Chemistry, Botany and Zoology would share the whole of the present Science Buildings, including the space at present occupied by the Engineering faculty, the Seed Testing Laboratory, and the State Laboratory. Geology we have sited with the Engineering faculty. Physics could either be allowed to expand on the Terrace/Gardens site, or in new premises erected on the Station site as the first of the new Science buildings.

Long term expansion from this site would first proceed by the gradual acquisition of the remaining property in the block. The total area bounded by Harcourt Street, Upper Hatch Street, Earlsfort Terrace, and Adelaide Road is 6.9 acres. More distant expansion, if ever necessary, might extend across Earlsfort Terrace and down Hatch Street.

54 U.C.D. and the Future

3. We have indicated earlier (Section IV) that the Terrace/Gardens site can carry a total of at least 13 acres of floorspace without overcrowding and without any encroachment on the central portions of Iveagh Gardens-- i.e. a further 10 acres can be erected there in addition to the retention of the existing 3 acres of sound floorspace.

The table of estimated needs given by the Commission (Report, p. 16) tells us that the provision for the complete needs of Medicine, Arts, Law, Commerce, staff, administration, examinations, library and student facilities requires a total of 297,200 sq. ft. nett (i.e. 396,300 sq. ft. gross or approximately 9 acres), which includes provision for 20% expansion. The inclusion of the total needs of Physics (44,700 sq. ft. gross) would add another acre to this. As 3 acres of sound floorspace are already in existence, the erection of a further 7 acres will provide more than adequately for all the needs of the above faculties, administration etc., and the department of Physics, with no less than 3 acres to spare.

If the new Medical school were to be erected on the Hatch Street side of the site, it could eventually be closely associated with the new Science buildings (on the Station site) when it becomes necessary to erect them. Indeed the two sites could be physically connected by a block bridging Upper Hatch Street.

Long term expansion on this site would take the form of (i) building up the site until it carried a total of at least 13 acres of floorspace (gross), and (ii) gradual acquisition of property along Harcourt Street and on St. Stephen's Green South as it became available.

General Considerations

It should be remembered that Dublin Corporation was in the past willing to permit the closure of Upper Hatch Street under certain conditions.

We wish to emphasise that we most certainly do not consider that our suggestion is the only possible one to effect a solution of the College's accommodation needs in the city centre. In the earlier sections of this Memorandum we have indicated that various alternatives might present themselves. The final solution to be adopted would depend on such factors as the degree of co-operation by the Government, particularly in regard to its own need for new offices; the possible development of an over-all plan for a 'cultural and educational area'; the granting or continued witholding of compulsory powers; the degree of cooperation or co-ordination that might be achieved with other institutions of higher education, in particular in the fields of science and technology (including architecture). It is obvious that any one of many different solutions might be achieved without a removal to the suburbs.

SUMMARY AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

1. This Memorandum is concerned mainly with Chapter I of the Report of the Commission on Accommodation Needsof the Constituent Colleges of the National University of Ireland.

2. We agree with many of the conclusions of the Commission, but not with its view that U.C.D. should be removed from its present site.

Summary and General Conclusions 55

3. The Commission is emphatic that is has 'not been concerned with solutions which might suggest themselves if the terms of reference had sought our views upon co-ordination within the University of over a wider field.' A 'solution' on these terms is unrealistic, and we regret that the Commission interpreted its terms of reference so narrowly.

The needs of U.C.D. should be closely co-ordinated with the position in the other Colleges of the N.U.I. In Dublin, the existence, and plans for the development of, the teaching hospitals (including the Dental Hospital), the Institutes of Technology, the College of Art, the Institute for Advanced Studies, the College of Surgeons, and Trinity College should also be taken into account.

4. In Dublin we have a 'cultural anl educational complex' of unique value, on the merits of which the President, Mr. de Valera, has expressed himself. It is situated in one of the finest parts of the capital, and includes some of the institutions listed above, the National Library, Museum and Gallery, other important libraries, and the headquarters of many cultural, educational and professional bodies.

Everything possible should be done to strengthen this complex. The area should be planned as a whole. To move U.C.D. would result in grave losses to the College itself and to the city. The development of a plan for the area need not interfere with the relief of the needs of U.C.D., if expansion is undertaken around its present site.

5. A removal to Stillorgan Road would result in serious difficulties for all faculties, particularly for those engaged in professional training. These depend on facilities in the city, and substantially on part-time staff engaged in professional practice there.

6. The College provides educational and cultural services to the community other than the teaching of its full-time students, e.g. evening degree and diploma courses, extra-mural courses, public lectures and facilities for cultural bodies. If U.C.D. moves, these services will be much less accessible, and space for some of them may have to be provided in the city at extra expense and at the cost of divorcing them from the College.

7. In assessing the capital cost of the proposed move, the majority of the Commission makes no estimate of the cost of the movable furniture and equipment for the new College. We believe that this cost will be considerable and call attention to the Minority Report which says that 'the cost of the new University if it is properly equipped, will be nearer to £10 million than £5 million.' Further, the Commission's estimate makes no provision whatever or the highly important Agriculture and Veterinary Faculties.

The Commission does not refer to the considerable increase in running costs which will result from the proposed substantial expansion of the College.

Unless the total cost of the proposals, the increased running costs, and the cost of other plans for expanding higher education are assessed in advance, some of these projects may not be carried to completion. It would be tragic if this happened after part of U.C.D. had moved to Stillorgan Road.

The total cost of all current proposals is so great that expansion should