Papers of James Meenan – Move of UCD to Belfield

6 U.C.D. and the Future

1. THE COMMISSION AND ITS REPORT

The Commission on Accommodation Needsof the Constituent Colleges of the National University of Ireland was appointed on 26th September, 1957. Its terms of reference were: 'To enquire into the accommodation needs of the constituent colleges of the National University of Ireland and to advise as to how in the present circumstances, these needs could best be met.'

The Report of the Commission was published on 2nd June, 1959. It consists of four chapters, the first of which, on the needs of U.C.D., had been presented to the Government as an interim report on 14th June, 1958; the second on U.C.C. was presented on 18th October, 1958; whilst the third on U.C.G. and the concluding chapter were presented on 1st May, 1959.

The first chapter and the concluding chapter give the Commission's view that the space requirements of U.C.D. cannot be met on or near its present site, and that the only solution is for the College to move to a site on the Stillorgan Road over a period of five to ten years. The Commission further recommends that the Government should make £6,700,000 available to the College over this period for building needs.

Narrow View of Terms of Reference

The Commission admits (Report p.3) that 'other solutions might present themselves if the terms of reference had invited views upon co-ordination within the University or over a wider field.'

We do not believe that the Government intended to fetter the Commission by limiting the possible solutions to the problem. Neither can we agree that its terms of reference compelled it to treat each College as if it existed in isolation and to exclude all examination of the possibility of co-ordination within the N.U.I. (leaving the 'wider field' aside for the moment).

It was not, for example, excluded by the terms of reference from considering the duplication of faculties (particularly the expensive medical and technological faculties) within the N.U.I. Can, or need, the N.U.I. adequately develop its three medical schools or its three engineering schools?

In fact, the Commission did insert one recommendation in this regard, when it says (Report p.77): 'The provision for the accommodation needs of the Faculty of Agriculture in University College, Dublin will require adjustment if a full Faculty of Agriculture is established in Cork.' But why the reference to agriculture only - what about medicine, engineering and the sciences.

Such questions were, we maintain, well within the terms of reference of the Commission and should have been considered by it particularly as it was required to consider the needs of the N.U.I. within the framework of present conditions. The financial considerations involved in duplication and triplication of faculties are of paramount importance.

The Minister for Education at the first meeting of the Commission (15th October, 1957) said that 'it would be their task to examine the problems objectively and to relate them to the national need.' This latter task the Commission failed to accomplish.

Dublin's University Area 7

Taking its narrow view of the terms of reference, the Commission has attempted to produce an answer to a purely artificial question: 'What would be the needs of each College of the N.U.I., if it existed in isolation, serving the community immediately surrounding it, and if no other institutions of higher learning or of medical, agricultural or technological education existed in the country?'

To this hypothetical question the Commission has provided one answer. But we are as far as ever from a realistic solution of the problems of university education in Ireland, or even of the problems of U.C.D. Indeed, we hold that the Commission's recommendations on U.C.D. have only bedevilled the matter.

Haste in Deliberation

The Commission may partly be excused for its narrow view of the terms of reference by the fact that it was under considerable pressure to complete its study rapidly owing to the urgency of the accommodation needs of the colleges and particularly of U.C.D. It is regrettable if the Commission allowed itself to be rushed by this. A temporary solution by limiting student numbers, or by providing temporary accommodation, would have been preferable to an incomplete examination of the problem.

This was the first public examination in many years of any part of the Irish university question and the very first examination of U.C.D.'s acquisition of the Stillorgan Road estates. It took place at a time critical to the development of the Irish universities and of higher education in general including, in particular, technological, medical and agricultural education. The times are critical also in the wider spheres of national economics and industrial development, spheres in which the universities will have to play an important role. After so many years of official inactivity in the matter of the University College, the fullest, unhurried consideration should have been given to all the factors involved.

II. DUBLIN'S UNIVERSITY AREA

Advantages as a University Site

Few, if any, capital cities in Europe have within their university areas as much open space as exists in Dublin in the area extending from Trinity College southwards to the Grand Canal. We, have, in turn, College Park, Merrion Square, Leinster Lawn, St. Stephen's Green, Iveagh Gardens and 'the Lawn.'

Further, the built-up areas between and around these open spaces have a very low density of building. Virtually all the existing buildings in the area were dwelling houses (though now converted, in most cases, to office use) having long back gardens and, frequently, extensive mews (vide - the area between Merrion Square South and Baggot Street, or between Lr. Earlsfort Terrace and Leeson Street, or between St. Stephen's Green East and Pembroke Street).

University College, Dublin, is not hampered in its desire for expansion, as were older universities in other capitals, by being surrounded by edifices of great historical, cultural or architectural value (as in Paris, Rome, Madrid, Vienna) or by extremely valuable commercial property of very high density (as in Stockholm, Copenhagen, London or in the British industrial cities).

8 U.C.D. and the Future

Indeed, quite close to the College, the whole area south of Harcourt Road stretching to the Canal and extending from Peter's Place to Charlemont Street is essentially an area in poor condition which will have to be cleared and the inhabitants rehoused either elsewhere or in flats on the same site.

Further, the shopping streets within this general area, Merrion Row, Lr. Leeson Street, Charlemont Street, are of relatively low value as compared with principal shopping streets in a capital city -- a consideration, if any such streets had to be acquired for university expansion.

It is not of course suggested that the public squares named above should be built on, but that buildings in their vicinity should gradually be acquired for university and other cultural and educational requirements.

Misleading Comparisons

In its Report (p.34) the Commission says -- 'in the English and Danish universities we visited we found that the authorities were dealing with problems similar to that of Dublin.' The universities visited were Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham, Reading, and in Denmark, Copenhagen and Aarhus. The commission also made use of information supplied by the universities in Wales, Edinburgh, Exeter, Liverpool, Sheffield and Southampton. We believe that it is misleading to assert that the problem in Dublin is similar to that in these cities. Only one capital city was visited -- Copenhagen -- where the old university was situated in the densely built-up old part of the city. In this case we are told also (Report p. 34) that 'details of the area of the sites of the University of Copenhagen are not yet available to the Commission.' Aarhus is a provincial University of 1800 students.

The conditions in the British industrial cities bear no comparison with those in Dublin. A description written about those very universities mentioned by the Commission -- 'buildings frequently dingy and cramped and sometimes sordid, set in an environment of smoke and slums' -- could never be applied to Dublin. Overcrowding of incompleted buildings we have -- and that can be relieved on the present sites -- but sordidness and smoke and slums we most decidedly have not in our general university area.

In none of the cities mentioned by the Commission is there a cultural and educational complex such as we have in the university area of Dublin. Those few British universities which are moving out to a campus site in the suburbs are in no case leaving an area which houses a second university with a worldfamous copyright library, a National Library, Gallery and Museum and the headquarters of so many professional institutes.

Dublin's great good fortune in the matter of its centrally situated university area has frequently been the subject of envious comment. We have quoted two such recent comments in our Appendix J.

Further, as the authorities of U.C.D. have frequently pointed out, the College may be regarded as the direct successor of Newman's Catholic University. The present site is associated both with Newman's effort and other Irish aspirations after university education.

Taking the above facts together, a university in any other capital Dublin|city would

Dublin's University Area 9

consider itself very fortunate in having such opportunities for development, nor would powers of compulsory purchase be denied to it, if required.

The Cultural and Educational Complex

The existence of the many institutions in this area must be taken into account:

1. The principal museums, galleries, and the National Library. 2. Trinity College, Dublin. 3. Various other cultural, professional and educational bodies (e.g. Institute for Advanced Studies, Catholic Central Library, Royal Irish Academy, Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Surgeons, Royal Institute of Architects, Royal Society of Antiquries). 4. Several university hostels, under Catholic ecclesiastical control (see Appendix D for a list). 5. A great deal of other property under esslesiastical and/or educational control. Much of this consists of schools inadequately housed in converted dwelling houses and falling below modern standards and requirements for such schools (See Appendix D.) 6. The Houses of the Oireachtas, which are inadequately provided for, and Government offices which are expanding.

This whole complex of Government, university, cultural and educational establishments should be considered as a whole and no one aspect of it (such as the needs of U.C.D.) can be properly studied without taking into consideration all the factors involved in the planning of this area. One can, however, say straight away that to dismember this complex, by removing U.C.D. from it, is the least happy of solutions.

If the removal of U.C.D. from the area presented a final solution to the other conflicting problems that exist within it, then there would be that much extra to recommend the move. But it does not present such a solution. Now is the time to ask what is the final solution to be aimed at in providing adequately for the needs of:

The Houses of the Oireachtas The Government departments The National Museums and Gallery The National Library The National College of Art The Institute for Advanced Studies The many schools in the area Trinity College

Government Offices

One possible solution to many of these problems would be a Government decision to remove the Houses of the Oireachtas and at least some of the Government offices to another site. Kilmainham has often been mentioned, and the site there is large enough to provide for a single solution. The difficulty

10 U.C.D. and the Future

in such a proposal is the capital cost involved (but see Section III D below). However, it costs nothing to take a decision and to make a plan which could be gradually implemented enabling other interests to formulate long-term plans.

One might consider in turn various possibilities for U.C.D. if any one of the following Government offices were to be moved:

(a) External Affairs from St. Stephen's Green, South (b) The Office of Public Works from St. Stephen's Green, East, and Earlsfort Terrace. (c) The Department of Agriculture from Upper Merrion Street. (d) The Land Commission and adjacent offices from Upper Merrion Street.

(a) External Affairs: These buildings adjoin property already held by the College on St. Stephen's Green and might become the administrative centre for the College. Iveagh House might provide an official residence for the President of U.C.D.

(b) Office of Public Works: Nos. 50 & 51 St. Stephen's Green (once the home of the College of Science, before the Merrion Street block was built) might form a fine administrative centre for the College and act as a link between Merrion Street and Earlsfort Terrace. The houses occupied by the Office of Public Works in Earlsfort Terrace would prove a welcome addition to the College property, presenting a frontage of 220' along Hatch Street.

(c) Department of Agriculture: The removal of certain Government offices from the main Merrion Street block would go a long way to providing for all needs of the science departments already housed there. The removal of all Government offices and the transfer of the Engineering faculty to a new site would provide more than enough space for all the needs of Chemistry, Botany, Zoology and Geology at present located in that building.

(d) The Land Commission and Adjacent Offices: The Land Commission and the offices of the Comptroller and Auditor General occupy a number of Georgian houses in Upper Merrion Street. On the west side they have a total frontage of 450', the depth ranging from 85' through 140' to 300'. The evacuation of these houses would also help the College. The existing Government and Science buildings on the west side of Merrion Street were built on the site of a similar Georgian terrace acquired for the purpose by compulsion about 1903.

We understand that the work of the Land Commission is gradually decreasing. Could not these houses be made available to the College as the Land Commission staff gradually shrinks?

Further there are grounds for believing that many of the Georgian houses are drawing towards the end of their useful lives. Some are so far gone as to be in need of extensive repair amounting to complete reconstruction, or replacement - witness the fact that two Georgian houses occupied by Government offices in Kildare Place had to be pulled down in recent years because of their dangerous condition. Much of Georgian Dublin in this general area must, sooner or later, be completely reconstructed or replaced, irrespective of any plans for U.C.D.

Dublin's University Area 11

A Comprehensive Plan Needed

We urge that serious consideration be given to the idea that any reconstruction or replacement in the area should take place in the interests of higher education, and of the universities in particular, in the furtherance of a plan to preserve the general area for cultural and educational purposes.

The question of U.C.D. requirements, whether they are to be fulfilled by expansion from the present site or by complete removal to ouside the central city area cannot be considered in isolation. The question involves essentially a problem of town planning in a most important area of the capital.

An overall detailed development plan for the area should be prepared without delay by a suitable planning authority, armed with the necessary powers to see that the plan is implemented as circumstances and the degree of national prosperity permit.

As a minimum there should be retained in this area the universities, the Institute for Advanced Studies, the College of Art, the National Library, and the National Museum, or at least its Division of Irish Antiquities and the botanical, zoological and geological collections. To remove any one of these collections from the area to, say, Kilmainham, whilst transferring U.C.D. to the Stillorgan Road, would be unjustifiable.

The alternative to a long-term plan is the gradual disintegration of the area. The conflicting pressures within it will lead in time to many of the institutions concerned leaving the district one by one. If the ideal of the planners of this complex of cultural and educational buildings is to be preserved, action now is imperative.

Mr. de Valera's Views

We are happy to note that His Ecellency, President de Valera, speaking as Chancellor of the National University, on the occasion of the Golden Jubilee Celebrations a year ago and some six months after the Commission had presented its first interim Report (which contained their recommendations in respect of U.C.D.) expressed himself in the following terms (we quote from the "Irish Press," 4th December, 1958);

"Once he had had the idea that the portion of the city running from Hatch Street and Earlsfort Terrace down to Pearse Street, including Kildare Street and Merrion Street, might become the cultural centre of the city.

They had there the great libraries -- the National Library; the library in Kildare Street of the Academy, and the National Gallery of Art, and the National Museum.

As a temporary measure the Parliament was brought into that area. It was intended to be temporary at the time, and he had the hope that with the College of Science at hand they might be able to use that area to meet some of the pressing needs of U.C.D., so that the whole area, including Trinity College, with its magnificent library, would become the cultural centre of the city. Financial and other difficulties arose and that had become an impossible dream.

34 U. C. D. and the Future

economies in staff and equipment and, more important still, from the point of view of providing the best possible teaching for the students and of facilitating research. In any moves towards closer ties with the universities, however, it would be important to preserve the essentially research character of the Institute's appointments.

Now that our universities are about to achieve a consider expansion, it might be an opportune time to review the functions and constitution of the Institute.

3. TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN -- THE COMMISSION'S MINORITY REPORT We have concerned ourselves almost entirely with examining the Majority Report of the Commission, but we feel that some comment must be made on the Minority Report, signed by Mr. Aodhogan O'Rahilly. Whereas the majority, working within their rigidly interpreted terms of reference, make no reference to T.C.D., Mr. O'Rahilly goes to the other extreme and find a solution in a complete amalgamation of U.C.D. and T.C.D. We believe that his solution is too facile. Further, the danger in his Report is that, when it is read in conjunction with the Majority Report, it would seem to imply that his solution is the only alternative to the majority's solution, that Trinity, so to speak, is the alternative to Belfield. Now here we shall be emphatic: We are making a case for keeping U.C.D. where it is, and our case would stand even if T.C.D. did not exist.

The logical alternative to the Belfield proposal is not that contained in the Minority Report but the case that we are making: It is both undesirable and unnecessary, for the reasons outlined, to remove U.C.D. from the city centre.

But we cannot leave the question of Trinity College without asking whether its existence is quite irrelevant to the desirability of keeping U.C.D. at Earlsfort Terrace. Is the present proximity of U.C.D. to Trinity of no significance beyond the fact that they are the major parts of a cultural and educational complex? We are persuaded that whatever the significance may be now, it will grown with time if only through considerations of economy. We note the new position in veterinary education, where the two schools of Veterinary Medicine will use the same buildings and equipment provided by the Government though functioning as separate schools. Co-opertaion has existed between the two Colleges in the faculties of Agriculture and of Engineering. T.C.D. students attended at the Albert College and were granted engineering workshop facilities at U.C.D. We believe that sharing of space and equipment could be extended to other departments, notably in science and technology. We have already discussed the imminence of a technological university in Kevin Street and Bolton Street, its probable impact on U.C.D., and the need for rationalisation. We recognise that the case of T.C.D. is different in many respects, but not in this matter of sharing specialised facilities.

The possibility, then, of sharing accommodation and equipment in certain departments with T.C.D. presents us with yet another argument for keeping U.C.D. on its present sites. Any such sharing of facilities would result in further economies, and this saving would become more and more pronounced in future years as it becomes increasingly imperative to avoid duplication in

U.C.D. Accommodation Needs 35

the provision of the costly equipment that will be required if this country is to keep abreast of the latest developments in scientific and technological education. We believe that to move U.C.D. would certainly minimise the possibility of making such arrangements and perhaps preclude them for all time.

IV. U.C.D. ACCOMMODATION NEEDS

Introduction The Commission accepted the U.C.D. authorities' own estimate of the College's total accommodation needs, based on the then current student numbers plus an increase of 20%. It did not make any attempt to relate student numbers 'to the national need,' excusing itself by the highly contentious statement (Report, p.43) that 'freedom of entry is a university tradition and is specifically an Irish tradition.' This ignores the fact that freedom of entry is unreal as far as the majority of Irish people are concerned because of the cost of university education and the paucity of scholarships.

We do not see that limitation of student numbers by the raising of entrance standards would necessarily be unjustifiable.

Further, the Commission's narrow view of its terms of reference prevented it from considering 'co-ordination within the University or over a wider field.' If this was done, it says, 'other solutions might present themselves.' It is probable, for example, that if the Colleges in Cork and Galway were expanded and improved the numbers wishing to attend U.C.D. would be reduced.

However, for the purpose of this Section, we will follow the Commission and accept the College's estimates.

A. SPACE AND CONSEQUENT SITE REQUIREMENTS

We set out below, with what we hope is greater clarity than was employed by the Commission, an analysis of the space and consequent site requirements of U.C.D.

Nett requirements for a complete new College, assuming surrender of all present buildings at Earlsfort Terrace and Merrion Street . . . 610,630 sq. ft. nett Add 33.3% for circulation etc . . . . . . 203,540 sq. ft. nett Hence, total requirements . . . . . . . . . 814,170 sq. ft. gross

This includes provision for a 20% expansion above immediate needs. Subtracting amount required for future expansion (1/6th of above) --

For future expansion . . . . . . . . . 135,700 sq. ft. gross Requirements for immediate needs . . . . . . 678,470 sq. ft. gross

Accepting, for the moment, the 'rule of thumb' used by the Commission, that one acre of ground is required to erect one acre of floor space (irrespective

42 U.C.D. and the Future

In disagreeing with the suggested site plans proposed by the College's Architectural Advisory Boards and in suggesting (Report, p. 38) that the faculty buildings should be spaced out over the whole of the 250 acre site, the Commission has shown itself less wise than the experts. For the architects were aware of the grave difficulties attendant on such open planning as is recommended by the Commission and of the attempts currently taking place in Britain to rectify the worst excesses of the sprawl-planners, as at Keel, Reading and Nottingham. In the case of the last-mentioned, which has 'for the first time in a University, an "open" plan based on access by car, motorcycle or bicycle,' efforts are now being made to have at least part of the original plan 'drastically tightened up and re-landscaped,' although 'unfortunately the rest of the scheme seems likely to be left in its present scattered state.' All this, after the university has been half built!

We consider that the sites extending from St. Stephen's Green southwards to the Canal (or, taking the broad view, extending from the Green northwards to Nassau Street) are ideal for the development of a sequence of quadrangular enclosures. Such expansion by cellular or courtyard plan would embrace all the essential qualities needed in university buildings. Both teaching and residential blocks in Trinity College are so disposed around quadrangles, and the Science Buildings in Merrion Street might be considered as another such enclosure. Others could centre on Iveagh Gardens, the 'Station site' and 'The Lawn' (see sections V & VI). These three quadrangles would be immediately adjacent to each other, and the Science Buildings (if retained) would be only five minutes' walk away. Thus the faculties of the College would be more closely united than in the Commission's scheme. Such a quadrangular type of development is at once compact yet bright and airy, keeps both students and staff in close contact, and even within a city faces inwards, like the 'Oxbridge' colleges, enclosing its own precincts and shutting out, but not completely excluding, the outside world. Such a university within a capital city appears to us to be the ideal—it makes the best of both worlds.

D. W. Brogan, writing in the 'Cambridge Journal' (1952, V, 210), considers that the great civic university, closely integrated with the life of its city, has a considerable advantage over the older, more isolated cloistered foundations. If that be true of the provincial universities in the British industrial cities, how much more true it could be of a new U.C.D. fully integrated with our capital and situated in its very heart. 'Let the rulers of the civic universities of England (and Scotland) reflect,' writes Professor Brogan, 'that they, not Oxford and Cambridge (or Yale and Princeton) are the normal universities of the modern world.'

4. ATTITUDES TO COMPULSORY PURCHASE

One of the most extraordinary features of the Report is its refusal to recommend powers of compulsory purchase of property. In the case of U.C.D. the Commission writes: 'We would hesitate to recommend the granting of compulsory powers. The disturbance to homes and business would be too great' (Report, p. 31). Elsewhere in the memorandum we show (Section V) that, in fact, the disturbance need not be great.

In the case of University College, Cork, one member of the Commission goes so far as to insist on having a four-line minority report of his own,

U.C.D. Accommodation Needs 43

dissociating himself from the recommendations in so far as they 'may imply or contemplate the control and/or acquisition of adjacent private property compulsorily.' The property in question is open land as yet unbuilt on, which adjoins U.C.C. and which it obviously must have if any logical development is to take place.

We are at a loss to understand this extreme aversion to compulsory control in a matter of national importance. Compulsory powers are available to local authorities and to statutory bodies such as the E.S.B. for daily invocation, if needed, in such relatively minor matters as straightening a road, widening a bridge, or erecting a small transformer station. Under the Town and Regional Planning Acts various powers of compulsion are granted for a variety of matters including, if need be, 'for the preservation of views and prospects.' More interesting still is the fact that all Vocational Educational Committees have (under the 1930 Act, Sec. 28) powers of compulsory acquisition. Yet the University Colleges are to be denied such powers in their pursuit of the important work of expanding facilities for higher education.

It is to be noted that if the recommendations of the U.C.D. Architectural Advisory Board (as set out in Appendix IV, page 4, to Chapter I of the Report) be accepted in full, then for the widening of the Stillorgan Road, if the amenities of the proposed new college are to be preserved, compulsory powers may have to be invoked by the local authority to acquire private property on the east side of the road. Thus the apparent evil which the Commission is determined to avoid on sites adjacent to Earlsfort Terrace may become inevitable on sites adjacent to the Stillorgan estates.

In its final chapter (p.124) the Commission declares: 'A solution of the Dublin College's accommodation problem in the vicinity of Earlsfort Terrace could be made possible only by large-scale compulsory acquisition of valuable residential, business, and hotel premises. We could not recommend such a course.' Reading this, an outsider unacquainted with the district would be led to believe that the College is sited in the heart of a densely built-up residential and business area. One might think that large blocks of important commercial or industrial buildings were involved. But, as we show elsewhere, this is not true and, further, no hotel property need be involved.

It is quite natural to dislike the idea of disturbing people in their homes. But in the areas which we consider might be acquired immediately by U.C.D. the number of homes is minimal, and anyway many people are content to be disturbed if offered a reasonable margin above the current market value of their property. The process of acquiring property in areas adjacent to Earlsfort Terrace does not necessarily involve the legal machinery of compulsory acquisition. The ordinary processes of purchase have first to be tried. We feel that the position in regard to this question was well summed up by Mr. P. Callinan, F.R.I.C.S., when he wrote in the 'Irish Builder and Engineer': 'The College should long ago have had granted to it powers for the compulsory purchase of property, as whatever objections can be raised to the granting of such powers, they are trivial when compared with the handicap on a statutory body of being without them.' (See Appendix I).

In this particular matter the disruption to the life of the College, and the damage to its place in the community, caused by the proposed move would be so great as to far outweigh the objections to granting such powers (which