Pages 34 & 35 - IV. U.C.D. Accommodation Needs

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 Govern-
ment 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 work-
shop 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 num-
bers 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