Is Provost's Garden freely accessible from campus?

Mr Pseudonym · 19-04-2014 10:04pm #1

I always assumed it isn't, but am I wrong?

In the event that it isn't, I think it should be. Apparently the Provost doesn't live in 1 Grafton St, and it's just used for events (though, my source could be wrong!). A partition near the house could discourage people peering into the windows. Space is tight on campus, and another cosy nook would be really cool!

20-04-2014 7:24am

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I always assumed it isn't, but am I wrong?

In the event that it isn't, I think it should be. Apparently the Provost doesn't live in 1 Grafton St, and it's just used for events (though, my source could be wrong!). A partition near the house could discourage people peering into the windows. Space is tight on campus, and another cosy nook would be really cool!

No, it's definitely not accessible. The only time I know that people are even invited in is the garden party on Trinity Monday.

I don't know whether he lives there or not. Provosts usually do and the last one certainly did.

bonerjams03 · 20-04-2014 12:59pm

234 wrote: »

I don't know whether he lives there or not. Provosts usually do and the last one certainly did.

I'm pretty sure he does. I remember a radio piece talking about his young son loving being able to roam around campus - great for a kid I'd say, round the clock security.

20-04-2014 1:36pm

Yep, he lives there. It's private property therefore not freely accessible.

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 6:28pm

Thanks for responses. Obviously, his residing there scuppers my plans somewhat! How about it be open during the week, but closed during the weekend?

Does anyone else think it would be a favourable addition to the campus?

This is the only picture I could find of the garden. According to my source who wrongly said the Provost doesn't live in the house (!), "living quarters" are upstairs, so, if true, it's not as if people could peer in on the Provost and his family. But, from the picture, the flowerbed gives some distance from the window, anyway.

Anita Blow · 20-04-2014 6:34pm

I think it should remain a private residence. He has a family and they deserve to have their own space and privacy

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 7:07pm

Anita Blow wrote: »

I think it should remain a private residence. He has a family and they deserve to have their own space and privacy

I can see an argument for retaining the house and garden in its original form - though, you should remember that the house contains several "entertaining" rooms, so it is not as if it's a private residence.

Addressing that the Provost lives on campus: were the house to not exist, and it were proposed that it be built now, there would be questions as to whether it's appropriate that accommodation on a campus where space is much-restricted should be given and whether it should have a private garden. The concept of living on campus is antiquated, and is a legacy of when a much larger percentage of the faculty and students lived on campus. We now have a situation where almost half of all Scholars will live off campus, and where more rooms are being allocated to International Students (that's not to say that International students aren't a valuable part of our community (the College bursar will tell you that they certainly are!), just that one (or, at least, I) would prefer the accommodation allocation to be more representative of the student-body as a whole). The rationale for having the Provost living on campus is ever-diminishing.

Opening the garden would not impinge on the privacy of the Provost, just reduce one of the benefits of the position - which (and I mention this for full disclosure rather than as a slur) includes a salary of just under €200k.

20-04-2014 7:21pm

TBH, it's not even that nice a garden. I would prefer if we made more out of the green spaces that we already have on campus.

Extrasupervery · 20-04-2014 7:59pm

Yeah I think it's a private house and private garden where a family with kids live. Don't think anyone would appreciate hordes of people letting themselves into their back garden...

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 8:05pm

234 wrote: »

TBH, it's not even that nice a garden. I would prefer if we made more out of the green spaces that we already have on campus.

Have you any ideas what could be done?

I think a small area of New Square should be converted to include a sitting area - perhaps under the trees by House 39. I can see the rationale for not allowing walking on grass, but is it necessary all year round? The area outside the Fitzgerald Building could probs be improved. It goes without saying that College Parks is an invaluable part of the campus, and absolutely stunning on summer days when students slumber on the slopes. But, I do wonder if it could not be utilised better at times. Permitting people on the grass during lunch, perhaps. As many people jog around the side, some measure should be put in place to prevent that area becoming muddied.

Extrasupervery wrote: »

Yeah I think it's a private house and private garden where a family with kids live. Don't think anyone would appreciate hordes of people letting themselves into their back garden...

You portray it as if it's the Provost's own house. It's the College's, and the College should decide whether the house ought to have a garden. In most cases, the Provost is of such an age that there are no children.

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 8:32pm

Judging by Google maps, Provost's Garden is actually quite large - it has at least the same area as Fellow's square, and possible more.

Taco Chips · 20-04-2014 8:43pm

I wonder if the provost would be as happy to give up some of his privileges, seeing as he is so adamant on diminishing those of others for the sake of the college's finances.

bscm · 20-04-2014 8:53pm

I've heard that Luce Hall is finally being demolished over the summer, and they're still fixing up the patch between the SNIAM and the Fitzgerald which used to contain the huts.

TBH green areas around College never bothered me too much over the past 3 years. There's normally somewhere to sit down outside. And those of us down the Hammo end rarely see daylight after Senior Fresh anyway.

Plus, as you keep saying, space is at a premium. I'd rather see some reading rooms/extra library space being built than a little patch of grass.

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 9:05pm

bscm wrote: »

I've heard that Luce Hall is finally being demolished over the summer...

Are they still going to be replace it with a student centre? I heard they're building some business and innovation centre :mad:

And those of us down the Hammo end rarely see daylight after Senior Fresh anyway.

Wasn't there a proposal to distribute Vitamin D to you guys?!

Plus, as you keep saying, space is at a premium. I'd rather see some reading rooms/extra library space being built than a little patch of grass.

I think you're being unfair. I was never suggesting that "a little patch of grass" take precedence of extra study space. But, this large garden exists; it gets very little use; why not open it to public?

20-04-2014 9:38pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

In most cases, the Provost is of such an age that there are no children.

The last Provost's children lived there for years. The current Provost has young children. That's 20 years of occupation with children.

EuropeanSon · 20-04-2014 9:50pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Judging by Google maps, Provost's Garden is actually quite large - it has at least the same area as Fellow's square, and possible more.

I think it's a little bigger than Fellow's square, haven't been there for a year though as the new schols were banished to the exam hall this year.

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 9:51pm

234 wrote: »

The last Provost's children lived there for years. The current Provost has young children. That's 20 years of occupation with children.

Well, I never thought I'd research the ages of TCD Provosts! Hegarty was 52/53 when appointed (elected) and Prendergast was 45/46. By "no children", I meant no young family members: a garden is hardly a requirement for teenagers. Perhaps I was loose with my argument, but it stands that Provosts tend to be relatively old and therefore likely to be without young children.

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 10:18pm

I'm not obsessed...I promise! But, I had to check something else on Bing maps, so I thought I'd screen grab what's below:

TCD_Provosts+House.png

bscm · 20-04-2014 10:44pm

'Friad it's a protected structure. From Dublin City Council: "The Provost's House, Trinity College: House, boundary walls, gate piers and gates".

Getting permission to knock a gate/entry to the garden from campus would be an issue and then there's potential damage to the house/garden from the public/student body (the rebranding and cutback scandals won't go away anytime soon), which could only increase the Council's and College's reluctance to allow access to the garden.

http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/HeritageConservation/Conservation/ProtectedStructures/Documents/Record%20of%20Protected%20Structures,%202011-2017.pdf

Mr Pseudonym · 20-04-2014 10:58pm

bscm wrote: »

'Friad it's a protected structure. From Dublin City Council: "The Provost's House, Trinity College: House, boundary walls, gate piers and gates".

Getting permission to knock a gate/entry to the garden from campus would be an issue and then there's potential damage to the house/garden from the public/student body (the rebranding and cutback scandals won't go away anytime soon), which could only increase the Council's and College's reluctance to allow access to the garden.

http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/HeritageConservation/Conservation/ProtectedStructures/Documents/Record%20of%20Protected%20Structures,%202011-2017.pdf

I'm impressed. Certainly, that does complicate matters. But, most structures in TCD are protected, so I don't see why there would be excessive concern regarding potential damage.

quadrifoglio verde · 20-04-2014 11:41pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Have you any ideas what could be done?

I think a small area of New Square should be converted to include a sitting area - perhaps under the trees by House 39. I can see the rationale for not allowing walking on grass, but is it necessary all year round? The area outside the Fitzgerald Building could probs be improved. It goes without saying that College Parks is an invaluable part of the campus, and absolutely stunning on summer days when students slumber on the slopes. But, I do wonder if it could not be utilised better at times. Permitting people on the grass during lunch, perhaps. As many people jog around the side, some measure should be put in place to prevent that area becoming muddied.

You portray it as if it's the Provost's own house. It's the College's, and the College should decide whether the house ought to have a garden. In most cases, the Provost is of such an age that there are no children.

What could be done with the current green spaces???
EM being able to walk on them for a start every day instead of only during the Trinity ball.

With regards the student centre, the students voted against it, as the current student population would have to contribute towards it, but not get the use, ala UCD.
This I thought was a foolish stance on the college's behalf. It should have been contribution towards it once it was built.

I don't think the provost house and gardens should be made available to the public. Although if you wish to have a peak in, the gate on grafton street is sometimes open, just don't have your student card on you (if you're not a student you can't be fined).
I stumbled into it one day with herself a few years ago after she convinced me it was an entrance.

On the age of his children, they're around 15, 14 and 10.
I don't know about you but if I had kids that age, the last thing id want is students and tourists traipsing around my back garden. Id be open to it being made public/access to students and staff, if the Provost wasn't based there, but its not going to happen.

Trinity has more pressing things to worry about, than a small bit of green space, such as where the money is going to come from to keep the lights on.
While people mightn't like cutbacks, if Ive a budget of X and running costs of Y and Y is greater than X, well then something has to be trimmed back on.

Mr Pseudonym · 21-04-2014 12:06am

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

What could be done with the current green spaces???
EM being able to walk on them for a start every day instead of only during the Trinity ball.

With regards the student centre, the students voted against it, as the current student population would have to contribute towards it, but not get the use, ala UCD.
This I thought was a foolish stance on the college's behalf. It should have been contribution towards it once it was built.

I don't think the provost house and gardens should be made available to the public. Although if you wish to have a peak in, the gate on grafton street is sometimes open, just don't have your student card on you (if you're not a student you can't be fined).
I stumbled into it one day with herself a few years ago after she convinced me it was an entrance.

On the age of his children, they're around 15, 14 and 10.
I don't know about you but if I had kids that age, the last thing id want is students and tourists traipsing around my back garden. Id be open to it being made public/access to students and staff, if the Provost wasn't based there, but its not going to happen.

Trinity has more pressing things to worry about, than a small bit of green space, such as where the money is going to come from to keep the lights on.
While people mightn't like cutbacks, if Ive a budget of X and running costs of Y and Y is greater than X, well then something has to be trimmed back on.

I'll respond in order.

While I am more than sympathetic to your position regarding walking on grass, I do think that it shouldn't be permitted in winter or when the ground is waterlogged.

That's a shame. IMO, Trinity desperately lacks a central socialising spot; the Arts Block is more like a subway station. When was that vote?

I made this banal point above: it's not the the office holder's garden - it's that of the house. The Provost merely has use of the house, so s/he shouldn't have sole command as to the garden's use. A convincing argument has yet to be given for why the Provost deserves a substantial private garden when space is at such a premium. I proposed above that it could be closed to students/public on the weekend, when the Provost is overwhelmingly more likely to use it. Another option would be to have a partition, which would allow an area to remain permanently private (the garden appears large enough to allow that). It should also be said that it's unlikely to get significant use were it opened - partly because of its seclusion, but also because other places, like the Rose Garden, don't see many people.

I hate the argument that because something is more important, a lesser thing should be ignored.

quadrifoglio verde · 21-04-2014 12:39am

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I'll respond in order.

While I am more than sympathetic to your position regarding walking on grass, I do think that it shouldn't be permitted in winter or when the ground is waterlogged.

That's a shame. IMO, Trinity desperately lacks a central socialising spot; the Arts Block is more like a subway station. When was that vote?

I made this banal point above: it's not the the office holder's garden - it's that of the house. The Provost merely has use of the house, so s/he shouldn't have sole command as to the garden's use. A convincing argument has yet to be given for why the Provost deserves a substantial private garden when space is at such a premium. I proposed above that it could be closed to students/public on the weekend, when the Provost is overwhelmingly more likely to use it. Another option would be to have a partition, which would allow an area to remain permanently private (the garden appears large enough to allow that). It should also be said that it's unlikely to get significant use were it opened - partly because of its seclusion, but also because other places, like the Rose Garden, don't see many people.

I hate the argument that because something is more important, a lesser thing should be ignored.

Well should we sort out the stuff of least importance first and the stuff of most importance last?

With regards to space being at a premium, what exactly should this space be used for?
As it is the rule in Trinity, the grass isn't for walking on, so what would opening up the green area around the Provost garden serve to do?
And as you say, the rose garden gets little use. The area behind the rubrics and beside the Museum building gets little use. So what does opening up access to the Provosts garden achieve?

What trinity lacks most of all is development space and I can't see Dublin City Council being too willing to allow a building be built in the rear garden of 1 Grafton St.

As far as I remember the vote was last year, but may have been the year before. It certainly needs a student centre, but the students refused to contribute towards it, so it was put on the long finger.

Mr Pseudonym · 21-04-2014 12:51am

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Well should we sort out the stuff of least importance first and the stuff of most importance last?

With regards to space being at a premium, what exactly should this space be used for?
As it is the rule in Trinity, the grass isn't for walking on, so what would opening up the green area around the Provost garden serve to do?
And as you say, the rose garden gets little use. The area behind the rubrics and beside the Museum building gets little use. So what does opening up access to the Provosts garden achieve?

What trinity lacks most of all is development space and I can't see Dublin City Council being too willing to allow a building be built in the rear garden of 1 Grafton St.

As far as I remember the vote was last year, but may have been the year before. It certainly needs a student centre, but the students refused to contribute towards it, so it was put on the long finger.

No - not that either!

It should be possible to do several things concurrently without having to attach precedence to only one of them.

It would provide a grassy area to walk and sit! Fellow's Square, Library Square, New Square (the area behind Rubrics), College Parks, Rugby Pitch are all out-of-bounds.

I'm glad they wouldn't allow it!

quadrifoglio verde · 21-04-2014 1:02am

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

No - not that either! It should be possible to do several things concurrently without having to attach precedence to only one of them.

It would provide a grassy area to walk and sit! Fellow's Square, Library Square, New Square (the area behind Rubrics), College Parks, Rugby Pitch are all out-of-bounds.

I'm glad they wouldn't allow it!

But we have lots of grassy areas already?
What makes you think that by giving access, students will be able to walk/sit on said grassy area? Surely it'd just be given another keep of the grass sign?

Mr Pseudonym · 21-04-2014 1:11am

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

But we have lots of grassy areas already?
What makes you think that by giving access, students will be able to walk/sit on said grassy area? Surely it'd just be given another keep of the grass sign?

Rose Garden and area outside Fitzgerald Building don't have restrictions. The squares are out-of-bounds because it's necessary to keep the grass as pristine as possible and because, in some people's eyes, having people on the grass detracts from their grandeur. Neither applies in Provost's Garden.

languagenerd · 21-04-2014 2:11pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Are they still going to be replace it with a student centre? I heard they're building some business and innovation centre :mad:

As others have said, the SU put it to a vote in 2011 and the students voted no.
They wanted to charge a levy to all students for 20 years to fund it. Most of the students who paid for it wouldn't still be around to use it, and anyway, it was only going to have stuff that we already had on campus - coffee shop, bar and couches - so it didn't seem worth the money. Yeah, maybe it might have been nice, but we could use the spaces we had better (Pav, Buttery, Vaults, Atrium, all the coffee shops) instead of charging students even more money. With 16,000 students, that levy would have made €1 million a year - why did it need to be 20 years?

http://universitytimes.ie/?p=1648

The student centre has been promised for ten years now, it being a central plank of current Provost John Hegarty’s manifesto. The passing of this referendum would have cleared the final funding hurdle and construction would have begun in earnest. Trinity students were asked if they would be willing to pay a levy of €69 with an additional €2 being added every year for twenty years.

Mr Pseudonym · 21-04-2014 2:46pm

languagenerd wrote: »

As others have said, the SU put it to a vote in 2011 and the students voted no.
As far as I remember, they wanted to charge a levy (can't remember how much, think it was over €100 per year each though) to all students for years until it was paid off. Most of the students who paid for it wouldn't still be around to use it, and anyway, it was only going to have stuff that we already had on campus - coffee shop, bar and couches - so it didn't seem worth the money.

Trinity annoys me soo much, sometimes! Why couldn't students pay a quarter of the fee for every year of use they get? We don't have a venue for gigs or nightclub, though. The sofas in the Arts Block cater only for that end of campus and aren't in any way sufficient, and Goldsmith Hall is most unpleasant. IMO, TCD campus life is pretty bad, and having somewhere with pool tables (not ones that cost six quid!) and general hang-out areas would encourage more people to stay on campus during lunch, and bring about more activity on campus during evenings. A university without a student centre is, surely, most unusual.

Edit: just reread. "Over €100" PER YEAR? :eek:

languagenerd · 21-04-2014 3:10pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Trinity annoys me soo much, sometimes! Why couldn't students pay a quarter of the fee for every year of use they get? We don't have a venue for gigs or nightclub, though. The sofas in the Arts Block cater only for that end of campus and aren't in any way sufficient, and Goldsmith Hall is most unpleasant. IMO, TCD campus life is pretty bad, and having somewhere with pool tables (not ones that cost six quid!) and general hang-out areas would encourage more people to stay on campus during lunch, and bring about more activity on campus during evenings. A university without a student centre is, surely, most unusual.

Edit: just reread. "Over €100" PER YEAR? :eek:

I edited the post after you quoted it there. It would have been €69 the first year and increased by €2 per year after that for 20 years (ending at €109).

Polka_Dot · 21-04-2014 4:20pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Trinity annoys me soo much, sometimes! Why couldn't students pay a quarter of the fee for every year of use they get? We don't have a venue for gigs or nightclub, though. The sofas in the Arts Block cater only for that end of campus and aren't in any way sufficient, and Goldsmith Hall is most unpleasant. IMO, TCD campus life is pretty bad, and having somewhere with pool tables (not ones that cost six quid!) and general hang-out areas would encourage more people to stay on campus during lunch, and bring about more activity on campus during evenings. A university without a student centre is, surely, most unusual.

Edit: just reread. "Over €100" PER YEAR? :eek:

There are pool tables in the Parlour in Goldsmith Hall

Mr Pseudonym · 21-04-2014 4:46pm

Polka_Dot wrote: »

There are pool tables in the Parlour in Goldsmith Hall

Yeah, I know. But, it's at the other end of campus... And you'd have to cross a road... And Gold Hall isn't very nice... And..!

Anita Blow · 21-04-2014 7:55pm

There's also pool tables in the GMB.

As has been said, there is a shortage of development space on-campus, but there's by no means a shortage of green space. We have the cricket pitch, new square, the rose garden, fellows square and that little green outside the physics building to sit and relax, and you'll even find many people sitting out in front square.
I think a lot more is lost, in terms of the provost's quite reasonable right to have a private garden for him and his family, than is gained in terms of another green space which will likely be underused.

In my opinion, not everything in the college has to be a commodity that should be exploited to encourage more tourists etc. The rare nature of students getting to experience the garden on Trinity Monday, or the other seldom occasions the garden & house is opened up to others such as the Global Graduate Forum last Summer adds to the character of the garden and how lucky it is as a student of the college to be invited there.

hfallada · 22-04-2014 10:36am

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Trinity annoys me soo much, sometimes! Why couldn't students pay a quarter of the fee for every year of use they get? We don't have a venue for gigs or nightclub, though. The sofas in the Arts Block cater only for that end of campus and aren't in any way sufficient, and Goldsmith Hall is most unpleasant. IMO, TCD campus life is pretty bad, and having somewhere with pool tables (not ones that cost six quid!) and general hang-out areas would encourage more people to stay on campus during lunch, and bring about more activity on campus during evenings. A university without a student centre is, surely, most unusual.

Edit: just reread. "Over €100" PER YEAR? :eek:

TCD couldnt possibly be any more in the center of the city. Why does TCD need a nightclub when there is about 20 within 15 mins walk? Plus everyone in TCD has a different taste in music.

A student center is need in UCD and DCU, where the campus is miles from the city and anything entertaining. There is countless cinemas, cafes,restaurants, bars within mins walk of TCD. A student center would be nice, but not necessary. Why do people need to hang there during lunch? IMO its better to go to a different place to eat everyday, rather than being forced to eat the daily special in a massive, dull dining hall like NUIM.

Lawliet · 22-04-2014 11:26am

There does need to be more places to hang out and eat lunch, but there doesn't need to be an entire Student centre for that, if they could just get more seating in main areas and find a few more rooms around campus to throw some tables and chairs into. Very simple and low cost.

Mr Pseudonym · 22-04-2014 4:03pm

Anita Blow wrote: »

There's also pool tables in the GMB.

As has been said, there is a shortage of development space on-campus, but there's by no means a shortage of green space. We have the cricket pitch, new square, the rose garden, fellows square and that little green outside the physics building to sit and relax, and you'll even find many people sitting out in front square.
I think a lot more is lost, in terms of the provost's quite reasonable right to have a private garden for him and his family, than is gained in terms of another green space which will likely be underused.

In my opinion, not everything in the college has to be a commodity that should be exploited to encourage more tourists etc. The rare nature of students getting to experience the garden on Trinity Monday, or the other seldom occasions the garden & house is opened up to others such as the Global Graduate Forum last Summer adds to the character of the garden and how lucky it is as a student of the college to be invited there.

The GMB pool tables were referred to in a previous post: I said, "...somewhere with pool tables (not ones that cost six quid!)..."

One is not allowed on the grass at New Square, Fellows' Square, Front (Parliament) Square, or Library Square.

I feel I'm being painted as someone who wishes to rob the Provost of privacy, and remove all luxury. Allowing public access to the garden would not effect the Provost's privacy, though it would reduce the luxuries of the position. I'm really quite surprised that so many posters feel that a private garden the size of Fellows' Square is justifiable!

The best argument for the retention, IMO, is that it is primarily used for ceremonial occasions. Are you really arguing that it should remain private so that the experience of the overwhelming minority of students is heightened at the expense of others, though?

hfallada wrote: »

TCD couldnt possibly be any more in the center of the city. Why does TCD need a nightclub when there is about 20 within 15 mins walk? Plus everyone in TCD has a different taste in music.

A student center is need in UCD and DCU, where the campus is miles from the city and anything entertaining. There is countless cinemas, cafes,restaurants, bars within mins walk of TCD. A student center would be nice, but not necessary. Why do people need to hang there during lunch? IMO its better to go to a different place to eat everyday, rather than being forced to eat the daily special in a massive, dull dining hall like NUIM.

The huge variety of options in Dublin has the effect of fragmenting the student-body, and doesn't encourage a community.

There are bars in Dublin, yet TCD has one. So, there may be reasons for having a club despite an abundance elsewhere. But, I wasn't suggesting there be a regular nightclub - just that there be a space where one could be hosted.

The Lost Sheep · 22-04-2014 5:42pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

The GMB pool tables were referred to in a previous post: I said, "...somewhere with pool tables (not ones that cost six quid!)..."

One is not allowed on the grass at New Square, Fellows' Square, Front (Parliament) Square, or Library Square.

I feel I'm being painted as someone who wishes to rob the Provost of privacy, and remove all luxury. Allowing public access to the garden would not effect the Provost's privacy, though it would reduce the luxuries of the position. I'm really quite surprised that so many posters feel that a private garden the size of Fellows' Square is justifiable!

The best argument for the retention, IMO, is that it is primarily used for ceremonial occasions. Are you really arguing that it should remain private so that the experience of the overwhelming minority of students is heightened at the expense of others, though?

The huge variety of options in Dublin has the effect of fragmenting the student-body, and doesn't encourage a community.

There are bars in Dublin, yet TCD has one. So, there may be reasons for having a club despite an abundance elsewhere. But, I wasn't suggesting there be a regular nightclub - just that there be a space where one could be hosted.

There is huge variety in all places. Trinity doesn't need a space where a club could be hosted it would be a waste of time and resources better used elsewhere
Allowing public access would definitely affect the Provost privacy

Mr Pseudonym · 22-04-2014 5:52pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Trinity doesn't need a space where a club could be hosted it would be a waste of time and resources better used elsewhere. Allowing public access would definitely affect the Provost privacy.

...In your opinion. Obviously, I'm entitled to mine.

The Provost's House is accessed from the front; the living quarters are on the upper floors. How would it effect privacy?

bscm · 22-04-2014 9:08pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

The Provost's House is accessed from the front; the living quarters are on the upper floors. How would it effect privacy?

Simple right angled triangles. The line of sight in that garden extends to the upstairs windows. You'd have to tint them to keep privacy (or keep all visitors close to the windows to prevent their line of sight from reaching the windows). Not an easy task on a listed building as I've mentioned earlier.

Also there's the noise issue, unless the Provost has some sort of super, sound-proofed glazing, he's going to hear loud students and tourists all day (it's impossible to keep people quiet outside, unless we steal UCD's Librocop and install him in this garden).

I personally wouldn't want to look out my window and see a group of Spanish students hitting a football against my door (seen that play out at the pomodoro today), or students sunning themselves with cans of Bav.

Mr Pseudonym · 22-04-2014 10:25pm

bscm wrote: »

Simple right angled triangles. The line of sight in that garden extends to the upstairs windows. You'd have to tint them to keep privacy (or keep all visitors close to the windows to prevent their line of sight from reaching the windows). Not an easy task on a listed building as I've mentioned earlier.

Also there's the noise issue, unless the Provost has some sort of super, sound-proofed glazing, he's going to hear loud students and tourists all day (it's impossible to keep people quiet outside, unless we steal UCD's Librocop and install him in this garden).

I personally wouldn't want to look out my window and see a group of Spanish students hitting a football against my door (seen that play out at the pomodoro today), or students sunning themselves with cans of Bav.

Given that the house is in the centre of town, I'd imagine the windows are sound-proofed! Windows are far from the ground, and one is unlikely to be able to see into them during daylight hours (gardens would be closed after that).

Librocop? Hmm...Provocop? Actually, no - PSNI might think we're moving in on to their turf.

I won't argue on this point any more, but I think you and others exaggerate the level of potential activity. I don't ever remember seeing someone playing football anywhere but on the pitches, so don't think it's gonna happen. Garden is close to the security hut in Arts Block, so could be monitored.

Anyway, based on responses to this thread, I won't make it a central pillar of any potential run for SU presidency!

23-04-2014 12:12am

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Given that the house is in the centre of town, I'd imagine the windows are sound-proofed! Windows are far from the ground, and one is unlikely to be able to see into them during daylight hours (gardens would be closed after that).

Librocop? Hmm...Provocop? Actually, no - PSNI might think we're moving in on to their turf.

I won't argue on this point any more, but I think you and others exaggerate the level of potential activity. I don't ever remember seeing someone playing football anywhere but on the pitches, so don't think it's gonna happen. Garden is close to the security hut in Arts Block, so could be monitored.

Anyway, based on responses to this thread, I won't make it a central pillar of any potential run for SU presidency!

You have argued yourself into a corner. In order for college to justify taking the garden off the Provost there would need to be substantial student usage. However, this is the same thing that would affect his ability to enjoy the rest of the property.

If you are saying that he won't be put out because not many people will be in the garden then there is no real justification for taking it off him anyway.

Mr Pseudonym · 23-04-2014 12:15am

234 wrote: »

You have argued yourself into a corner. In order for college to justify taking the garden off the Provost there would need to be substantial student usage. However, this is the same thing that would affect his ability to enjoy the rest of the property.

If you are saying that he won't be put out because not many people will be in the garden then there is no real justification for taking it off him anyway.

I don't agree. But, I have argued myself to the point of apathy.

Thanks for your contributions.

Extrasupervery · 24-04-2014 4:56pm

234 wrote: »

You have argued yourself into a corner. In order for college to justify taking the garden off the Provost there would need to be substantial student usage. However, this is the same thing that would affect his ability to enjoy the rest of the property.

If you are saying that he won't be put out because not many people will be in the garden then there is no real justification for taking it off him anyway.

Well spotted. If other green spaces in college are under utilised then why make a fuss of seeking another. This was a silly argument.

Mr Pseudonym · 24-04-2014 5:46pm

Extrasupervery wrote: »

Well spotted. If other green spaces in college are under utilised then why make a fuss of seeking another. This was a silly argument.

I'm unused to being dismissed in such a manner.

In your previous contribution to this thread you implied that "hordes of people" would use the garden were it allowed. It was relative to that that I cited other areas as not being thronged. However, given that students aren't permitted on the lawns of the squares, and the area outside the Fitzgerald is an unpleasant place to sit, perhaps there are reasons why the other green areas are underused.

As for 234's "well-spotted" argument, the justification for "taking" the garden need only be that better use would be made of it were it publicly accessible.

Lawliet · 24-04-2014 6:04pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I'm unused to being dismissed in such a manner.

Why does that not surprise me.

Mr Pseudonym · 24-04-2014 7:20pm

Lawliet wrote: »

Why does that not surprise me.

Erm...I don't know. You'll have to tell me.

24-04-2014 8:18pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

As for 234's "well-spotted" argument, the justification for "taking" the garden need only be that better use would be made of it were it publicly accessible.

Not really. Better use might be made of my house if it was opened to the public. Same goes for a lot of private property. You have to balance the public good against the legitimate ownership/occupying interest.

Mr Pseudonym · 24-04-2014 8:35pm

234 wrote: »

Better use might be made of my house if it was opened to the public. Same goes for a lot of private property. You have to balance the public good against the legitimate ownership/occupying interest.

Were your house owned by someone else, they may, except in some circumstances, legitimately chose to do that.

Edit: I understand your point about "legitimate occupying interest", but I don't believe a half-acre garden (nor, necessarily, any garden) is a legitimate requirement - but let's not argue that again.

24-04-2014 9:28pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Were your house owned by someone else, they may, except in some circumstances, legitimately chose to do that.

Not really. Just because somebody owns property doesn't given them an absolute right to do with it what they will. If somebody else owned my house, but nevertheless leased it to me, they couldn't just decide to open it up to the public.

Similarly, the Provost is not staying there at the whim of college. His entitlement is defined in his contract with the college. It's not some kind of ongoing gift, he has an actual right to it. It is part of the bargain that the college enters into when they elect a Provost.

Mr Pseudonym · 24-04-2014 9:35pm

234 wrote: »

Not really. Just because somebody owns property doesn't given them an absolute right to do with it what they will. If somebody else owned my house, but nevertheless leased it to me, they couldn't just decide to open it up to the public.

Similarly, the Provost is not staying there at the whim of college. His entitlement is defined in his contract with the college. It's not some kind of ongoing gift, he has an actual right to it. It is part of the bargain that the college enters into when they elect a Provost.

Come on, mate - this is fatuous now. If the College wanted to make the garden public, the Provost is very unlikely to block it on the basis that. Also, neither of us (I presume) has seen the contract.

24-04-2014 9:39pm

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Come on, mate - this is fatuous now. If the College wanted to make the garden public, the Provost is very unlikely to block it on the basis that.

The likelihood of the Provost blocking the idea doesn't go to the merits of the proposal. 12 years old children are unlikely to object to cutting the children's allowance, but that doesn't say anything about whether it is a good idea or not.

Mr Pseudonym · 24-04-2014 9:57pm

234 wrote: »

The likelihood of the Provost blocking the idea doesn't go to the merits of the proposal. 12 years old children are unlikely to object to cutting the children's allowance, but that doesn't say anything about whether it is a good idea or not.

You're now mixing arguments.

Is Provost's Garden freely accessible from campus?

Comments