A message from Peter Marshall, Vice-President Administration
2011 PARKING PERMIT ARRANGEMENTS – CAULFIELD CAMPUS
I am writing to you as a staff member who will be eligible to purchase a Caulfield campus parking permit in 2011.
In previous years, all of the parking bays utilised by holders of a blue parking permit at the Caulfield campus have been located on property owned by the Melbourne Racing Club (MRC). MRC has formally advised the university that as a result of the proposed racecourse precinct redevelopment, commencing in mid to late 2011, the MRC cannot guarantee the availability of land for parking beyond 31 July 2011.
To ensure we can guarantee the availability of parking spaces across the full year we will no longer utilise the car parks at the MRC previously utilised for blue permit parking. To replace these parking spaces we will redesignate 240 metered parking spaces in the multi- deck car park on the campus as blue permit spaces, and provide an appropriate number of blue parking permits available for sale in 2011. We will also redesignate a further 80 metered spaces as red permit spaces.
To ensure these additional blue permits and the associated spaces are available to students, staff members will no longer be eligible to purchase a blue parking permit at the Caulfield campus. Staff members will continue to be able to purchase red parking permits and we expect the increase in red permit spaces to be sufficient to meet demand based on past usage rates.
It is emphasized that to optimize usage of available spaces, red parking permit holders are guaranteed the availability of a parking space, while the availability of spaces for blue parking permit holders depends on the level of daily demand. This system is similar to parking across the university. The prices for the parking permits at Caulfield will remain as advertised, which are $650 for red parking permits and $350 for blue parking permits.
We do understand this change to parking arrangements may cause some concern to staff and students at the Caulfield campus however we stress that this matter is beyond the control of the university. The impact of the reduction in blue permit parking is offset to some extent by the excellent public transport servicing the campus and we strongly encourage students and staff to consider alternative transport options. Further information on alternative transport can be found at the website of the Office of Environmental Sustainability at http://fsd.monash.edu.au/travel-parking.
Queries and comments regarding car parking arrangements in 2011 should be forwarded to: https://my.monash.edu.au/askmonash
Glen Eira Debates 
January 24, 2011 at 6:56 PM
Cock sure of themselves, aren’t they? (Pun intended!) Councillors are being told once again how irrelevant they are.
January 24, 2011 at 10:12 PM
The gang of four has made their decision and through Frank Penhalluriack’s efforts been made to sit through residents Blah Blah Blah. In return for some short term pain (and a blocked Sir John Monash Drive) the University gets from the MRC support for their 28 storey development…and in eighteen months, the MRC are building a multi storey carpark on the guineas area for the University anyway. I think its called pissing in each others pockets and the gang of four (five including Newton) are in total support.
January 24, 2011 at 11:43 PM
Yup, we’re in store for blah, blah, blah. Perhaps 10 or 15 people will address council, then we’ll get lipshits telling everyone how closely he’s listened but he’s there to make the ‘hard decisions’ and for the good of the community. The good of the community will be to sacrifice all this open space and let traffic chaos begin so that his cobbers in the administration will get around 5 million so they can continue to crow about what a low cost council this is and how everyone else is in debt but with their wonderful stewardship glen eira is a paragon of virtue. The script has already been written. Let the bullshit begin and then let the community express its wrath at the ballot box when lipshits and his cronies are booted out on their arses and newton is faced with another municipal investigation that will prove once and for all the deviousness of his ways that is and has always been anti community.
January 24, 2011 at 8:06 PM
yeeaah, sure and how certain. recently there was a memorandum of understanding signed between monash and mrc. i wonder what it said in detail. but it seems to me that amendment c6o is assumed to be certain to be passed by the council. even if council rejects it, the new state government would not dare to go against the collusion of such big players like monash and mrc. so much for the ability of new liberals like david southwick to be able to change things. working with the communtiy he says. let’s see if he can handle newton et al? newton is on extended well deserving holiday. his many quiet meetings with mrc and trustees are now bearing fruit.
January 24, 2011 at 10:33 PM
Below are the comments which have been entered online at the Leader regarding C60 and the racecourse.
Brian
writes:
Posted on
21 Jan 11 at 12:03pm
In the latest piece of drip feeding of information concerning this massive development, several streets around the area will be widened and have two lanes, to help with the increased volume of traffic. Eskdale road is one of them. We also recently learnt that the building height is 23 stories, not 15 as previously stated. The MRC say they have a master plan, it’s time they realised ALL of it.
Mathew
writes:
Posted on
19 Jan 11 at 12:37pm
Is there a group or website we can look at where we can continue to gain info from about this disgraceful proposal? This coucil has a long history of allowing the heritage and character of this area to be demolished and buried underneth big ugly houses and hundreds of squeezed in units where open land or beautiful old houses once stood. This must be stopped. Thanks.
Adrian Jackson
writes:
Posted on
22 Dec 10 at 06:09pm
This park should be opened up to the public and the old WW2 era boundary fence removed. The horse racing and gambling types should not have near exclusive use of this huge area
Jason
writes:
Posted on
22 Dec 10 at 12:08pm
This looks like a big loss for residents and a big gain for developers and the MRC.
Loss of parking, loss of open space, loss of access due to congestion.
Developers will gain millions from a bunch of high rise buildings, some as tall as 23 stories.
The new Minister for Planning needs to put a stop to this quick smart.
Anita Crowley
writes:
Posted on
22 Dec 10 at 10:50am
The recent VEAC report listed Glen Eira as having the least open space of any municipality in Melbourne and presented compelling reasons for including public open space in high density developments. The hugely intensive Caulfield Village development does not provide any open space. On completion the development will contain approximately 2000 residences (say 3000 people) and attract approximately 4-6000 workers and visitors daily. The Planning Panel considered that Caulfield Park, the Centre of the Caulfield Racecourse and East Caulfield Park provided enough open space. Both Caulfield and East Caulfield Parks are already used to capacity. Anyone who has attempted to access the centre of the Racecourse will know how ludicrous including the racecourse centre in available open space is. Glen Eira Council needs to ensure open space in the Caulfield Village development – no open space = no development
Sensa Singh
writes:
Posted on
22 Dec 10 at 10:12am
As part of the huge Caulfield Village development, the website proclaims a new park for Glen Eira – 7229 m2. Actually, the new park will be less than 5584 m2. Of the 7229m2 the Melbourne Racing Club is providing to the people of Caulfield 1. 954 m2 is to be integrated into the Racecourse Reservation and hence will remain in the control of the MRC. Public access will remain unchanged. 2. 691 m2, currently used for stabling, will remain in MRC control for a minimum of 10 years. 3. The park – 5584 m2 of neglected land which is to be given to Glen Eira Council. Access is limited to the busy intersection of Kambrook, Booran and Glen Eira Roads (insure your child before you go there!!). There is no provision for parking – provision of parking will diminish the size of the park. Glen Eira Council has deemed it to be of little value, and not practical for community use, yet will be responsible for ongoing park maintenance.
Helen
writes:
Posted on
21 Dec 10 at 07:14pm
Thank you Council for at belatedly coming to your senses and allowing residents to comment on the Caulfield Village Overdevelopment. The Incorporated Plan (that had been submitted to residents for comment) was significantly modified during the Planning Panel process (building heights substantially increased and the related impact on traffic and parking were not considered). Additonally, the proposed Caulfield Function Centre and the Monash Univeristy development were also not considered. It is only right that the revised plans be resubmitted for community consultation and that the other proposed nearby developments be included in that consultation.
All Caulfield residents should rally against this massive badly planned development – not only is the development out of context with Caulfield but Council (a.k.a. the ratepayers) will be picking up the tab for all the traffic and parking problems it will generates.
Arlene
writes:
Posted on
21 Dec 10 at 06:30pm
At the Planning Panel hearings building heights were changed by 30-50% – 15 stories become 23, 6 became 8 and 3 became 6. And still with no details as to utilization of the increased height (residential/commercial/retail). If one extrapolates the figures before the panel hearings then 1200 reisdences becomes approx. 1900 (with predominantly 1 car park per person and no visitor parking), commercial and retail usage will involve approx. 2-3000 workers and 2-3000 visitors per day. Although the traffic/parking experts submission to the planning panel excluded the increased heights on the development, and any impact from the function centre or the huge Monash Development, the planning panel report conclusion was “that both existing and new residents will have difficulty accessing the development” and that parking would need to provided from surrounding streets. This is not planning – Council should not approve this development
Janice
writes:
Posted on
21 Dec 10 at 02:00pm
If the racecourse doesn’t need the land anymore for carparking, why don’t they build housing like was there before. Traditional houses with yards and trees. They will still make a killing without killing the area.
Frank
writes:
Posted on
21 Dec 10 at 12:55pm
I thought now the Brumby Government was kicked out, all this sort of stuff would stop. Developers would have to play by the rules like everyone else. It all seems so excessive and out of character. I hope they don’t approve this. It will be a disaster.
Maria
writes:
Posted on
21 Dec 10 at 11:27am
23 STORIES !!! Is that true? Shorely not in Caulfield.
How on earth will the roads and rail line handle that? Where will all and sundry park? The race club bought the land orginally so race goers could park. Now all of a sudden they don’t need to park on race day?
You can see local streets being overtaken with traffic and parking problems that will never get fixed. Drainage around the rail underpass will also be a bigger problem too. It floods now in heavy rain. All that extra run off will make it worse.
Council should vote NO!
Mike
writes:
Posted on
21 Dec 10 at 10:35am
Stating there has been four years of consultation isn’t quite right in my book. We have had four years of presentations with little if any real consultation. Council and the MRC are treating this as a forgone conclusion. The latest plans are said to have a 23 story building at one end, which previously hasn’t been part of the presentations. Objections from Chadstone and Malvern Central Shopping centres indicates this is going to be a massive development. Brace for the worst Caulfield residents, this thing is going to be a whopper that will change the very face of Caulfield, simply catering to developers greed.