Editor’s note
Thanks to everyone for sharing your views on this story. In recognition of the strong sentiment regarding potential impacts on parking, we have asked Property to provide a response (below). We will be addressing the issue in more detail – including the impacts of the train station closure – in next week’s issue of This Week.
In its latest announcement of the University’s unfolding Campus Master Plan, Macquarie has revealed its plan to develop two new office buildings at 8 and 10 University Avenue.
Adjacent to the new library, Cochlear Headquarters and the Australian Hearing Hub, the proposed buildings will further the University’s collaboration with commercial partners as part of a long-term vision to bring strategic stakeholders on to campus and establish an innovation nexus in one of Australia’s largest business park precincts.
The director of property at Macquarie University, Mark Broomfield, said the project would feature “vibrant atrium spaces and flexible floor plates, providing every opportunity to create and promote linkages between industry and the University.”
“The development will provide a dynamic, collaborative environment that will complement and enhance the Macquarie Park Innovation District being planned,” he said.
The proposed developments will each have a net lettable area of around 25,000sqm and each is being designed to minimum energy ratings of of 5-Star Green Star and 5-Star NABERS.
The project team, which includes an architectural collaboration between Kann Finch and Sissons Architects, has completed the concept design and is now preparing the detailed design to lodge a development application in the second half of the year.
Work could start on one of the buildings in late 2017 for completion in late 2019.
Prior to the closure of the affected car parks, existing car park infrastructure will be expanded to provide an equivalent number of spaces. This work is planned to commence later this year, and open in late 2017. In addition, Property hasconducted a complete review of the car parking management strategy to achieve a more equitable outcome for staff and students travelling to the University by car. A recommendation is being made to the Executive Group in the next month.
In regards to the train station closure, the University has established an Executive working group that will be identifying the impact of potential disruption to the University during the closure period while lobbying government for an improved interim transport plan while the station is closed.
-Mark Broomfield, Director of Property
Back to homepage
By All means, build this but can we wait until the new train line is open before we start knocking down the carpark? Day 1 the trains start running you can bring in the demolition crew.
Those parking stickers are a rort. Never enough parking to accommodate the number sold yet the price goes up each year exponentially. Students seem to fall for it every year though and buy them only to get the bus after they arrive late to lectures because they have repeatedly not found parking. It’s not ethical in my opinion. Keep in mind Mq is not really centrally located either so it’s hard to get staff and student to commit to the travel in the first place
As the University grows there is more and more demand for parking. As great as the train station is, not everyone can access public transport at their point of origin. The result is an increasing demand for parking on campus. It seems so wasteful to demolish existing parking and replace it when demand for parking is so high. Surely there is a more economical and holistic approach to locating new buildings! The demand for parking will only be heightened while the train line is closed- the timing seems poorly thought out.
University Avenue is often blocked with traffic. How will it handle extra traffic during demolition/construction?
Where will security move to?
What measures will be put in place to minimise demolition/construction noise inside the library?
Will the undercover motorcycle and disabled parking be moved out into the open?
Will covered walkways be built to connect the distant car parks with the university?
Absolutely agree that the parking issue should have been addressed in this article, and poses significant problems for staff and students. Driving around campus ‘hunting’ for a park is not the way to start a day at work/study (this problem will become even more frustrating given we’re paying for the parking ).
Whilst I appreciate that parking is a significant issue, new buildings mean greater number of cars in the precinct which is North Ryde. This coupled with the gargantuan increase in residential development on Herring and Epping Rds in the next two bringinging at least another 3000 people…the traffic congestion will be the worst in the country. During term time it can take 45 mins to just get out of Mac Uni onto Epping Rd…..
Just my 2 cents worth
Thanks to everyone for sharing your views on this story. In recognition of the strong sentiment regarding potential impacts on parking, we have asked Property to provide a response (below the story). We will be addressing the issue in more detail – including the impacts of the train station closure – in next week’s issue of This Week.
I notice on the master plan there are some new proposed car parking areas. Will they be completed before they tear down the parking to make way for these buildings? Considering the train station is closing for upgrading from next year there may be more people arriving by car than there is this year.
I’m all for development at university campuses for the benefit of students and teaching staff but what purpose do these office buildings achieve exactly?
What is the point of constructing buildings for dissociated external companies on a university campus? Shouldn’t we be constructing buildings for expansion of the university’s objective to educate and for research?
Especially considering that many Macquarie Unversity departments (ASAM, Physio, EPS/ CCFS, cognitive sciences, etc) are currently accomodated in these buildings (AHH, Luxotica, EMC2, BD, etc…) due to the lack of appropriate space in proper university buildings. Not sure about the financial arrangements for this kind of hosting, but one would assume that the University is renting these spaces to the companies that are renting these building to the University in the first place. So potential waste here.
As a sessional lecturer, I and others like myself pay excessive fees to go on safari to find parking so that we can facilitate 1- 4 classes over a one to two day period. A consequence of these debilitating safaris would render the searcher disabled, so securing a disabled sticker, like some able-bodied students, would solve our parking frustrations.
Perhaps the plan should include the construction of a multi-level parking deck that can be designed to include a section for paid railway station parking?
Disturbing comment.
Do you have any evidence of students fraudulently obtaining disabled parking permits – or are you just being casually ablist?
Another building? For who? I thought we need more parking spaces! I thought we put our students first!
I refer to the phrases “further the University’s collaboration with commercial partners” and “long-term vision to bring strategic stakeholders on to campus”. I find it incredibly frustrating that in its planning and development the University continues to blatantly demote the teaching of students, which should be its primary function alongside research. If the university expects to make money from ‘partnerships’, who is benefiting from that money? What exactly is an “innovation nexus”, and why is it lauded? Considering the other comments here, the actual university community – students and staff – are having their lives made more difficult, piece by piece, and an institution isn’t going to get very far without happy constituents.
I find it a tad concerning that all the way through the master plan that Commercial Interests is always listed in the same sentences as Academic/Student and Research Interests. Projects that are also purely commercial are also often hidden under the slightly misleading term ‘Non-Academic’. I don’t really like that businesses have the same priority and footing as the services and ideals that pretty much define what a University is: learning, research, and its student body.
Our University numbers have grown enormously over the past 10 years. With every carpark close to full by 10am I hope the University will be building parking to replace what is being lost with this development, and secondly additional parking to better accommodate the number of students and staff that require it. For students that arrive after 10am our parking lots look like Macquarie Centre at Xmas time. Can someone also confirm if our parking fees is going up next year to cover the new parking that will be built on campus?
The answer to the parking issue is in the Master Plan – see page 69 in particular. It looks like all parking will move to the periphery of the University – a substantial walking distance from any buildings located in the South and East ends of campus. Despite the University also growing to over 40,000 staff and students, there will be a fixed limit of 10,800 parking spaces… though I count only 4,468 in the diagram on page 69? Will the other 6,000+ be for commercial residents?
It also looks like all parking near Y3A and the W buildings will be removed. Not sure how parents will be able to access Banksia Cottage to drop kids off at daycare, or if they can, they won’t be be able to then park anywhere nearby, but will have to drive outside of campus to go find parking on the outer edges and then walk about 15-20 mins (or more?) to get to their building. This will easily add an extra 30-60 min. to the morning commute, drop-off and search for parking. It will not be very pleasant in weather like we had over the weekend, particularly when you have to walk across grassy areas and overflowing streams to get from your car to campus.
It will be interesting to see how the reduced parking spaces and closure of the train station for (at least) 7 months in 2018 will affect access to the University for both staff and students.
“It also looks like all parking near Y3A and the W buildings will be removed. Not sure how parents will be able to access Banksia Cottage to drop kids off at daycare”
The response is simple: Banksia Cottage as well as Gumnut Cottage are both planned to be demolished in the sort term according to the Master Plan 🙁
As a staff member who works different shifts it is often difficult for me to use public transport. I rely heavily on the impacted carparks. I would like to hear what options are being provided for staff and students who cannot easily use public transport.
I see that in the diagram there is a large proportion of the current multi level car parking will be consumed. As a staff member who is unable to cost effectively, (both time and money wise,) use public transport to go to/from work, I would respectively ask what measures have been taken to ensure that parking facilities within the university are kept up to par so as to service staff and students who need to commute by private vehicles. I am sure the designers of the buildings will incorporate sufficient parking for building staff and visitors, but this does not address staff & student parking currently in use.
Totally understand how this is going to be an upheaval for car-dependant students. But this is an opportunity to think about alternative more sustainable options such as cycling, public transport and walking or a mix of these.
“Epping to Chatswood rail disruption to last about a year”
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/epping-to-chatswood-rail-disruption-to-last-about-a-year-20150510-ggy5tg.html
We all know in Sydney Trains terms that means about 2 years, right?
I appreciate your point, but students/staff are often car-dependent as the ‘more sustainable’ options you mention are not viable for them. Not everyone lives within walking distance of campus, or can easily and safely utilise public transport. This is why the destruction of this carpark is so dire for so many. There is limited parking on campus right now. It is going to exponentially worse once those carparks are gone.
Since the cycle lane has been removed from the most direct route from my place to Macquarie I need to mix it with the traffic on narrow roads. Not the safest option.
Cycling: what about people coming from the Central Coast?
Public Transport: the railway is going to be out of action at exactly the same time.
Walking: not possible, if you live further than say Epping.
I live almost two hours away by car and have children to drop to school on the way , ‘more sustainable options’ are neither possible or desirable. It’s always a struggle to get here by 10am to grab the last available car space and now some bright spark has proposed this? Here’s the thing – build new parking first, it’s needed NOW. Another commercial building isn’t.. needed at all.
What a selfish and self centred response to real issues that students and staff face on a daily basis. Obviously not everyone is going to be able to “sustain” a “mix” of walking, cycling or be able to access PT from the place of origin. If you had remotely considered other peoples situation and the possibility that others are unable to come to campus except only by car you would’nt have made what I can only describe is a bubble comment. What about people with bad health or people who live far from PT and far from the campus? What about staff who come here and “hunt” for a space they paid for? What about the student that is stuck in traffic trying to get to their lecture/tutorial in bad weather and eventually gets here only to find there are ZERO legitimate car spaces? I’m sick and tired of the selfish attitude some people are taking award this issue. If it were a perfect world we would all be living a “sustainable” lifestyle, this is the real world, people have issues the weather changes, circumstances change and everyone lives to the best of their ability. We are here to work or study at the University and give the best we can. We only ask for a fair go and the least we can do is improve things for everyone, not hinder them more. We need to improve things for people taking the PT option and people coming in with private transport, not boast about living sustainable at all cost to everyone. It’s selfish and arrogant to think otherwise, we need to have compassion and thought for all who use our campus.
So, remove the only safe and close parking for Academia, Staff AND Students, and do it during the upgrade of the campus rail line…….. genius.
Oh yes, you’re right. Trash the parking at the same time the railway is out of action. Good planning.
Not a good news for students and staff. A new (ugly btw) building that will take vital car parks off from campus for the sake of hosting private companies? MCU will eventually look more like Macquarie Park than a real University. Another disappointing decision from above…
From the look to the structures I can see the new buildings will have parking underneath. My question here is if that parking will be available to students and staff working in Campus East or if it will only be for the tenants of the buildings. Nonetheless it looks like a lot less parking than what we currently have.
Like all the other office blocks, my bet is the parking underneath will only be for tenants.
Of course they won’t allow student/staff parking – the focus, as made clear by this news release, is not on improving the campus for the people who actually work and study here. The focus is on a simple cash grab. They haven’t even bothered to attempt to sugar coat it.
To be fair, the master plan does say that they will be expanding the parking areas across campus, to open up a lot more spaces in total. However if it isn’t completed by the time these three major structures go (especially as building is commencing roughly when the upgrades on the train line are being done, I think – no trains equals more cars) they are going to have a very very bad time.
The information I’ve seen is that parking will be created on current green space near the X carparks. So we lose more open, green space (and probably more trees) to accommodate… whom?
The University had huge problems leasing the Hearing Hub space and in the end had to fill it with our own staff on “decant” (an offensive term in itself for human beings) from buildings under refurbishment, rather than have the embarrassment of floors standing empty after the massive investment in that building.
Clearly the pitch for suggested tenants at the end of the article above means that we may well be heading for the same problem with this new project. Meanwhile, staff and students are crying out for more and improved teaching spaces and resources, we are highly casualised and lose millions to student attrition. How can this expenditure be justified when we can’t even be sure that the building will be fully tenanted and provide a return on the investment?
So……… where on earth are we going to park? You can’t plonk a new building down on one of the few hotly contested car parks on campus and not address this. Whoever designed this media release clearly does not work on campus (or perhaps they’re lucky enough to get their own designated spot and don’t have to worry about it!)
A very interesting sales article for the information it does NOT contain. Absolutely no mention about the car parks that are going to be demolished and what is going to be provided to replace these facilities. This plan seems to give no consideration to staff or students, only to money. I know, probably we’re all going to have access to the car parks under these new buildings? Pffft! Not likely.
From the image provided it seems that a major car park on campus will be removed. It would have been good to provide comment on that in this article as this will be in the forefront of many people’s minds when they read this, as it was in mine.
Convenient parking for that side of campus is already an issue, let alone how it would be if this carpark is removed. As well as providing more lettable space, it’s important to give consideration to students and staff with conditions that make it hard to move around on campus (but not enough to qualify for disability parking). This carpark is one of only a few with close access to many of the main buildings on campus.
And the massive parking structures that students use constantly are going to go…where exactly? Parking is already a hot topic among students, so if these structures are to be destroyed to make way for it there is going to be a bit of an uproar unless parking of the same size and convinience is provided before the originals are knocked down.
I was just about to make the same point. Parking is already at a premium (that students pay an exorbitant amount to access), with students taking over 30 minutes to find a spot in peak periods. University management clearly has its objectives in the wrong place if they’re not worried about making life more difficult for students and are more interested in profits. I assume that none of the parking of this commercial building will be made available to students or staff, ergo parking will only become more difficult.
One of the most common questions/complaints we have to deal with in Student Services is ‘Where can I actually park?’ and ‘Why would I pay for a parking permit when I can never find a park?’. I feel that this will only make it worse. Even if this is a way to try and get more people to take public transport or carpool, simply removing a large amount of space to make it more inconvenient is not the way to go.