Campus Development

Pythia

Hey all,

Found this website and thought it'd be interesting for people to see the plans for the swimming pool and other stuff UCD are planning to develop.

http://www.ucd.ie/campusdevelopment/index.html

Here's something on the swimming pool with a nice picture of what it should look like:
http://www.ucd.ie/campusdevelopment/transformationalprojects/studentcentre/swimming_pool.html

Sorry if people have seen all this before but it's the first time I've seen it.

dajaffa

I got an email about this, we're loosing one of the hockey pitches

funktastic

I think the whole new student centre development with a debating chamber etc was brought in very low-key. As in, people were voting for something without realising that it is hiking up the student fee by a lot. I can't remember the exact figures, but it's quite an amount that each student will have to fork out of their registration fee. some of the stuff was a bit extreme as well. I mean a debating chamber? Who's going to use that? The L&H and a few other select people who are into debating. The new student centre was only finished in 2000 (I think). It seems a bit much to be forking out on facilities that all students won't use. (Granted much of the plan seems good).

Tayto2000

'Debating Chamber' is a bit misleading... it looks like a lecture theatre, every club and society would get use out of that, doesn't have to be restricted to debates.

Shame about the green spaces though. I like that the MSCP is planned for an already built up area, I was assuming another swathe of grass would be going away to make room for it.

funktastic

In the original plan that people were voting for it was a picture of a debating chamber and described as such.

Tayto2000

Yes... My point is that a debating chamber is essentially a small auditorium. It's primary use is intended to be debates according to the early concept drawings, but that doesn't rule it out for other things.

Not all students will use the pool, does that mean it shouldn't be built?

pretty*monster

funktastic wrote:

I think the whole new student centre development with a debating chamber etc was brought in very low-key. As in, people were voting for something without realising that it is hiking up the student fee by a lot. I can't remember the exact figures, but it's quite an amount that each student will have to fork out of their registration fee..

If voters cannot be bothered to inform themselves of the issues then that's their own problem.
/played a small part in the 'no' campaign.

gubbie

Tayto2000 wrote:

'Debating Chamber' is a bit misleading... it looks like a lecture theatre.

What I don't understand is why they don't they get the college to build it and then charge the people who actually get to use it. They could do like they do in UCC-up everyone's registration fee by €150 and then give them free access to the wonderful new gym etc that we will never get to use

Red Alert

They have some cheek to put in what is essentially a fisher-price house of lords at great cost to the rest of us to satisfy the hacks in the SU. Definitely not worth my money.

The swimming pool is a great idea, but should be ideologically separate from the student centre building. They should just go 50m and bear the cost themselves. That would actually be worth the fee.

gubbie

Red Alert wrote:

The swimming pool is a great idea, but should be ideologically separate from the student centre building. They should just go 50m and bear the cost themselves. That would actually be worth the fee.

Yea cos we could get money back then with the London Olympics and as a training ground, climatising and all that

funktastic

'If voters cannot be bothered to inform themselves of the issues then that's their own problem.
/played a small part in the 'no' campaign.'

There was barely any debate on the project at the time as I recall. All that was shoved around was a glossy brochure showing a swimming pool and a debating chamber. Handing out hundreds of fancy artists mock-up's is hardly informing the voters of the real issues. Students will be charged for this out of the registration fees, but this was totally glossed over. There was nothing like the type of debating that went on for both of the Coke referendums, which was fine and warranted, but I mean for something that will be hitting each individual student's pocket (which the SU are always going on about trying to help) the level of debate was ridiculous on the new development plan.

'Not all students will use the pool, does that mean it shouldn't be built?'
A pool is a much more 'catch all' facility with elements that could be used by many more students. That's perfectly fine in my opinion. A debating chamber, no matter how much you try to tart it up, will only serve a purpose to a select few. By all means add one to UCD but don't expect every student to have to fork out for it. I've just finished in UCD after six years so I'm glad I won't have part of my money funding a wet dream for the youth wings of Fine Gael/FF/Labour etc

pretty*monster

funktastic wrote:

There was barely any debate on the project at the time as I recall. All that was shoved around was a glossy brochure showing a swimming pool and a debating chamber. Handing out hundreds of fancy artists mock-up's is hardly informing the voters of the real issues. Students will be charged for this out of the registration fees, but this was totally glossed over. There was nothing like the type of debating that went on for both of the Coke referendums, which was fine and warranted, but I mean for something that will be hitting each individual student's pocket (which the SU are always going on about trying to help) the level of debate was ridiculous on the new development plan.

I wasn't around for the coke debate but i gather that those campaigning on either side were pretty evenly matched. This wasn't the case in the reg-fee hike debate. Such is democracy, the yes campaign team attracted more people with better connections and more time to spare. The no team mostly attracted people who were still knackered from the sabbatical elections. The no team tried to shift the focus onto how much it was going to cost students but either the voters thought it was money well spent or they failed to notice (which is a bit stupid of them, since the reg fee hike was the reason why the issue was put to a vote in the first place.)
The level of debate is dictated solely by whether or not you can get enough students to give a damn about the issue. Quite simply, you can't force students to give a damn if they decide not to.

Red Alert wrote:

They have some cheek to put in what is essentially a fisher-price house of lords at great cost to the rest of us to satisfy the hacks in the SU. Definitely not worth my money.
.

Students have voted for it. They'd have some cheek to ignore their wishes

funktastic

Well when people cop on that the reg fee has raised so much due to this maybe they'll kick up a fuss. Anyway I think someone should draw attention to it and not just have people handing out glossy posters going 'Yeah ..a swimming pool..deadly'. I remember the turn-out was really low as well.

I just think it's ridiculous the lack of debate on the issue.

Young Siward

pretty*monster wrote:

Students have voted for it. They'd have some cheek to ignore their wishes

Well that's debatable, since the whole issue of whether that vote was quorate appears - from the outside looking in at least - fudged to say the least. To be fair I'm not impartial on this, and was involved in the no campaign to a degree as well.

John_C

Tayto2000 wrote:

Yes... My point is that a debating chamber is essentially a small auditorium. It's primary use is intended to be debates according to the early concept drawings, but that doesn't rule it out for other things.

If there's one thing the University is not short of it's lecture theatres. Building another is a complete waste of cash.

dajaffa

Red Alert wrote:

They have some cheek to put in what is essentially a fisher-price house of lords at great cost to the rest of us to satisfy the hacks in the SU. Definitely not worth my money.

The swimming pool is a great idea, but should be ideologically separate from the student centre building. They should just go 50m and bear the cost themselves. That would actually be worth the fee.

Tbh it was far more to satisfy the LnH and Lawsoc hacks, anyway I presume it'll have many more uses on top of formal debates.

One of the main reasons they opted for a 25m pool was that the running costs are less than a quarter of what they are for a 50m pool so in the long term it'd be either very expensive for students to use, or loose a sh1tload of money. Currently they are following 2 seperate avenues of funding to increase the size to a 50m pool, + applying for planning permission for both options to avoid delays.

John_C wrote:

If there's one thing the University is not short of it's lecture theatres. Building another is a complete waste of cash.

Yes but they belong to the University, who are treating some societies badly + not giving them rooms sometimes even when there are some available.

Red Alert

Why would the university have a problem with certain societies unless it's on the basis of their past record? I had no problem getting a room when needed for a society. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that we left the room in the condition in which it was found?

I think money would be better spent scrapping the debating chamber and on a 50m pool. Think about it, 25m pools are common everywhere. UCD wants to be the 'elite' according to its administration - then it should act like it.

dajaffa

Red Alert wrote:

Why would the university have a problem with certain societies unless it's on the basis of their past record? I had no problem getting a room when needed for a society. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that we left the room in the condition in which it was found?

Well I remeber there was a story in the Observer that services wouldn't give JazzSoc a room for their AGM, but anyway in general the demand for rooms has increased greatly with modularisation. As well having one theatre for society use seems like an ok idea to me, it'll make life a bit easier that there isn't as much restriction about what times socs can book.

Red Alert wrote:

I think money would be better spent scrapping the debating chamber and on a 50m pool. Think about it, 25m pools are common everywhere. UCD wants to be the 'elite' according to its administration - then it should act like it.

Again, it's the running costs. A25m pool, less than 0.25 the cost which means cheaper prices for usage. As well the difference in price between building a 50m pool over a 25m one, and a debating chamber is pretty huge. We'll only be getting a 50m if there is money coming in from outside.

Blush_01

To be honest DaJaffa, having organised the room for a weekly meeting in the Arts block for two years in succession, the problems only arise when going through Arts Services, who appear to hate students. If JazzSoc had gone through the Music Department, they might have had a better opportunity of getting a space. Alternatively they could have tried to get the Blue Room or one of the meeting rooms in the Student Centre (not that I know whether they did or not, but I'd imagine that they would have as an obvious solution to not having the Arts Block.)

Pride Fighter

A 50m pool will be nice. A hockey pitch going can only be a good thing, its a game for pansies, nothing compared to its ice equivalent.

Pythia

The UCD of the future
See here for more

sweet-rasmus

christ thats a scarey plan. i still don't see the need...

aequinoctium

wow - - the future as predicted

TheVan

I think it is really impressive and will put UCD on the map in terms of campus architecture.

I really like the way that they will be increasing the amount of green space in the centre of the campus, plus the changes to the dual-carriageway flyover.


All in all, a welcome development and something which will make UCD much more of a village/town as opposed to random crappy towns stuck in a park in a Dublin suburb.

abelard

What in the world is that bubble?

Also, if that's a Calatrava bridge for the flyover? If so, I hope they change it, as they seem to be everywhere and have become a bit of a cliché.

Otherwise looks good, particularly the central lake area.

Chakar

The plans are certainly very impressive with three construction projects, The Science District, Student Centre Precinct and the Gateway. It's certainly going to change the face of Belfield. I hope it goes well.

Red Alert

What happened to Engineering Building Phase 2?

Riamfada

Its Shaped Like A Big Heart!

irlrobins

A path across the lake? With drunken students?? Never going to happen.

It does look very futuristic. Be interesting to see how the actual plans look in comparison once it goes through planning permission etc. But hopefully what ever comes out at the end greatly improves the concrete image of UCD at present.

John_C

I'm no expert but the picture above really looks like it was designed to be viewed from above, to look impressive to someone viewing a plan.

I think those curves are going to make the gaps between the buildings very claustrophobic. Especially at night if you're going to be entering that space, not being able to see who's around the corner. If the buildings were laid out in straight lines they wouldn't look as flashy from above but might be a bit nicer to use.

Also, I don't know if I like the idea of a traffic free campus. Belfield is quite a big place, about a mile from one end to the other, there are plenty of valid reasons for someone to want the use of a car and the road as it is isn't that obtrusive.

Tayto2000

It's not traffic free, there's a multi storey to go in beside engineering (One multistorey per segment of campus). The plan is to have the main entrance pedestrian only, cars go in at a different entrance.

As mentioned, will almost certainly change with planning permission etc, the flyover in particular is DRCC property, not UCD's