Freo's View


Posted in architecture, city of fremantle, heritage, notre dame university by freoview on March 2, 2017

Fremantle Notre Dame University Vice Chancellor Celia Hammond has advised city residents that the university has asked the state’s Joint Development Assessment Panel-JDAP to adjourn the application for a five-storey development at 3 High street by four weeks so that the university can further explore the details.

The application was scheduled to be considered by JDAP next Thursday on March 9.

UNDA are engaging an independent heritage specialist to assist them in addressing the heritage matters which have been raised. They will also be seeking the input and comments of the City Officers and Councillors throughout this time, the Vice Chancellor said.

This is a very professional and mature approach by Notre Dame University and shows real consideration and respect for the feedback they received from Fremantle Council and residents.

Roel Loopers

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. freoishome said, on March 4, 2017 at 3:12 pm

    Great comments and very useful research. Thank you.
    83% is staggering. This is Gov’t funded preferential Catholic education! Education of all things should be secular, not clouded in opinion based belief systems.

  2. Andrew Priest (Aushiker) said, on March 4, 2017 at 11:20 am

    As I demonstrate below Roel The University of Notre Dame Australia does in fact receive public funding; in the last reported financial year (2015) it made up 83% of their total revenue.

    You may recall that you commented recently on the 100s or was it 1,000s of UNDA students back on campus. Well that is not because UNDA is only a full fee paying university that is for sure, rather it is because UNDA is an eligible University for Commonwealth Grant Scheme, i.e., students are eligible for supported fees, commonly known as HESC fees. The agreement with the University of Notre Dame Australia can be found on the Department of Education and Training website.

    Using nursing as example given the context of this discussion this means that the UNDA has 1,023.4 EFTSL funded places in 2017. The funding for nursing falls in Funding Cluster 6 which means a total payment per EFTSL of $20,462 from the Commonwealth of Australia. Of that $20,462 each student is meant to contribute $6,349 either up front or via the HECS-HELP.

    Through a search of the Australian Charities and Not-For Profit Commissions register I was able to obtain a copy of the 2015 financial report for The University Of Notre Dame Australia, the latest public report from what I can discover.

    The University reported a total revenue for the 2015 financial year of $172,296,000. This was made of the following amounts and their sources:

    Australian Government grants $78,355,000
    HELP – Australian Government payments $63,704,000
    State and Local Government financial assistance $622,000
    Fees and charges $21,577,000
    HECS-HELP – student payments $5,178,000
    Consultancy and contracts $137,000
    Other revenue $3,353,000

    That is ~ 83% of their reported total revenues in 2015 came from Commonwealth and state sources. I would suggest that clearly shows that they not only receive public funding but that they would unlikely to be able to continue in existence at least in their current form without it.

  3. freoview said, on March 4, 2017 at 4:23 am

    To be fair to Notre Dame, Andrew, they did hold two public community sessions and I am not sure that they receive public funding, but I do agree that they should have come back with a much better, and lower, design after the community sessions.


  4. Andrew Priest (Aushiker) said, on March 3, 2017 at 4:03 pm

    I wouldn’t describe it as professional at all. Notre Dame University has IMO has been nothing more than arrogant, thinking they have a right to laud it over the community. They have shown themselves to be incompetent in the management of this issue, not demonstrated an ounce of professionalism and given the university enjoys public funding serious questions need to be raised about the University’s use of funds in respect to the planning of this building.

    What the University is doing now is what it should have done up front … that is a what a competently run, professional organisation would have done. A simple test is to compare where the university has got the UNDA proposal to against the approach taken with the MSC building … Who was professional again?

    Notre Dame has tried to get away with a mediocre design, has got caught out and now are disrupting the process in an attempt to salvage her building plans. There should be no adjournment … they had a chance, they stuffed up, that is their problem.

    (This comment was edited for legal reasons)

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: