Village of Hall and District Progress Association Inc

A Position Paper

The future for Hall Primary School

The Association represents the needs and interests of residents of the village and the surrounding rural district. This district has always included parts of both the ACT and NSW, the larger part being within NSW.  It is from this perspective that we have considered the closure of  Hall Primary School and future uses of the school site.

Re-opening the school

In our view the best use of the site would be to re-open a public primary school, to serve the district, and others with a preference for a smaller, rural school. 

We believe the 2006 decision to close Hall Primary was a foolish and unnecessary one. The ACT government now boasts a substantial budget surplus. The cost of maintaining Hall Primary would be negligible in the budget context. An education system offering genuine educational diversity and choice would retain, as a high priority, an educationally sound, smaller school, with a distinctive rural character and tradition.

The case for maintaining Hall Primary was comprehensively set out in the submissions from the Hall Primary and Pre-School P& S Association. We observe now that the issue of primary education provision for the population of Hall and district is unresolved. The NSW government has resisted pressures from a substantial and growing district population to establish a school at Murrumbateman. We believe this pressure will grow, and that it would be sensible for the two governments to cooperate in re-opening Hall as a shared responsibility.

We also note that the case initiated by the Flynn school community challenging the closure of Flynn Primary is before the Supreme Court, and that a judgement in this case will have implications for other school communities.

If re-opening the school was at some stage to be definitively ruled out, then we would seek and encourage the interest of an independent provider to establish a school in Hall.  Two such expressions of interest have already come to the Association.  In our view, if the government determines for its own reasons to stop providing primary education in Hall, it should not create barriers for others willing and able to do so.

Meanwhile the school – which has been the heart of the Hall community – lies empty and abandoned, and the government resists all calls for reconsideration of closures. According to Minister Hargreaves, however: “nearly all the [school] sites will remain intact, in case schools need to be reopened in future decades to cope with demographic change”. According to the Canberra Times, ’The buildings are now likely to be occupied by government agencies and not-for-profit organisations, whose rents will be subsidised’. The Minister is quoted further saying that developers were his “lowest priority” – “We’re not in the real estate market. That’s why community groups get priority. This will  help them provide their services at as low a cost as they can”. (Canberra Times, 23 March). 

The consultants now gathering community views on school sites initially identified four ‘generic options’(below). The Minister was clearly advocating the first of these – a position that we are pleased to endorse as the best of the options immediately available:

Option 1	Retain all school buildings for community use and make the surrounding grounds urban open space.

Option 2	Retain the school buildings for community use, redevelop part of the site.
Option 3	Retain some of the school buildings for community use, redevelop most of the site for aged housing or other uses.
Option 4	Completely redevelop the site.

The ‘generic options’ have subsequently been further differentiated, resulting in an additional three. As a result our preferred option is now identified as Option 1a.  This Option keeps the site fully intact, rather than excising part to be added to ‘public open space’.

‘School recycled’

 Option 1a is, in effect, ‘school recycled’.  It envisages the present buildings (refurbished if necessary) being rented out for uses appropriate under the ‘Community Facility’ policy, as has happened at many other previous school buildings. This would achieve a significant aim for a number of people – keeping the school site for community uses, and keeping alive the option to re-open the school. 

There are existing structures and processes for such rental arrangements. The current rental rate is $110 per square metre per annum. We understand that there is substantial unmet demand for such accommodation. This is a solution that could presumably be implemented quite quickly.

A number of people have suggested use of the site for various forms of life education or lifelong education and training – particularly in the rural / agricultural domain, or for a range of art and craft facilities – including studio space, a gallery, exhibition centre, etc.  These, we believe are among the possible uses of the site and facilities predominantly ‘as is’, and might therefore best be considered as examples of ‘School Recycled’. It may be that if a well-resourced ‘lead organisation’ in either field (such as the CIT or Craft ACT for example) became interested in the site, then adult education, or art and craft, could become the dominant use. One respondent proposes a Farming and Agricultural Learning Centre for primary and secondary students.

The advantages of this option are that it 

•	can be implemented quickly
•	conserves the established landscape character and heritage values
•	brings some new activities, which could translate into jobs, and customers for present community services and suppliers.
•	keeps open the option of a future school

Before coming to the above conclusion, we developed a number of basic principles that we believe should inform any future planning and development concerning this  very important precinct. These principles are set out below. 

We have also considered the village context of the site and its heritage status, and explored, in consultation with the community, a range of alternative possible uses for the site. These are set out in attachment A

Basic principles

Following the public meeting the Association identified a number of key principles that we want to underpin consideration of any future possible uses for the site:

1.	Hall is a district centre for a significant and growing population that extends across the NSW border out towards Murrumbateman, down to the Murrrumbidgee, and out towards Gundaroo.
2.	Economic – the need to generate economic activity to help enhance the sustainability of village enterprises.
3.	Social / community -  the land is designated ‘Community Facilities’ and should be kept for community uses and not ‘privatised’.
4.	Rural character – any future uses should respect the rural village character of Hall, and enhance, rather than compete with it.
5.	Heritage – Any future development must respect the heritage status of the village, and the specific heritage values of the Hall school site.
6.	Landscape – The school site is integral to the village landscape – not just a block of land. The landscape values should be made explicit, and protected. For this purpose the whole of Sections 6 and Block 15 of Section 7 should be considered in relation to any future development.
7.	The ‘green village’. Any future development of any sort on the site should be exemplary in environmental terms (water and energy use, landscape management, waste recycling and disposal, etc)

We believe it will be helpful to adopt these principles as a framework for developing, and evaluating, any future development proposals.

Background. 

The ACT Government announced in December 2006 that Hall Primary School would be closed forthwith, but that the Pre-School would continue, at least for another year.

The Government subsequently established a Project Team (March 2007) to evaluate all the school sites affected by closure, and gave an undertaking that community consultation would be part of this process. Meanwhile, responsibility for the site and structures has been handed over to the Department of Territory and Municipal Services (TAMS), except for the Pre-School, which is still under the control of the Education Department.

We observe here that the Government had at least twelve months available to make decisions about future uses of school sites. The Minister managed to use the first eight of these in selecting a consultant. The original departmental brief was rejected by Cabinet as insufficiently rigorous and comprehensive, and so was redeveloped  (advice from Departmental officers). When tenders were received for this more elaborate brief, the Minister decided that they were too expensive, and tenderers were requested to restructure their bids to a specific dollar amount (advice from a tenderer, confirmed by the Minister in Hansard). A choice was eventually announced on  21 August 2007. The school was closed in December 2006.

Time available for community consultation has been more than halved – to about eight weeks, and the community is now being told that the timelines for decision are immutable.  We note the Minister’s generous capacity to extend timelines in order to cope with incompetence in government processes and decision-making, but seeming unwillingness to be as generous with affected communities.  This is hypocrisy.

Our consultation process 

On 7th February 2007 the Progress Association resolved to establish a Task Force (T/F) to explore and report within six weeks on possible future uses for the Hall school site, not precluding future educational uses.[This timetable was dictated by the departmental advice that community consultation was likely to occur in April 2007].

On Sunday 18th February the Primary School P & C and the Pre School Parents Associations had a combined meeting. It was resolved by both organisations that they would continue operating. The Pre-School Parents Association resolved that, although there are currently no pre-school children at Hall, they would work towards re-establishing the Pre-school in 2008. [The Pre School now has 12 enrolments and will be operating in 2008]. Both organisations were supportive of the Progress Association’s initiative in exploring future possible uses of the site.

The Association wrote to the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, John Hargreaves, advising him of the Association’s action. We have also discussed our initiative with the MLA for Ginninderra Mary Porter, staff of MLA Vicki Dunne (Opposition spokesperson for education), and staff of the school sites evaluation Project Team. 

The Task Force’s aim and approach

On 16th February a circular inviting submissions was widely distributed in the community. Twenty-four responses were received.  On 17th February a Press Release was issued, resulting in some media attention.  On 5th March the T/F issued a Draft Report, setting out the relevant background, and the main options to arise from the consultation.  A Public Meeting was convened on 14th March, attended by around 45 people. 

As only four of those attending the meeting had earlier provided written submissions, a total of around 65 community members either wrote submissions or came to the meeting, or both.

The survey asked for people’s thoughts on ‘possible future uses for the school site’.  Some 34 alternative possible uses were identified. A number of these were mentioned several times, including – aged people’s accommodation, adult education, art and craft complex, child care,  a park, and a community centre. 

The site

The school occupies a site of four acres (> 16,000 square metres). It occupies most of Section 6.  The balance is occupied by the Church of St Michael and All Angels, and the ACT Emergency Services facility.

Section 6 as a whole is designated ‘Community Facility’ on the Territory Plan. According  to the Territory Plan:

“…the Community Facility Land Use Policy aims to secure sufficient land in appropriate places for uses such as schools, churches, hospitals, theatres, galleries and museums, neighbourhood centres and community halls and residential care such as nursing homes and hospices. Facilities may be provided by either government or non-government agencies.

The policies also permit other developments, including offices and public agencies, where these re operated by organisations providing community facilities or services which meet the social, cultural, leisure, health, community well-being and developmental needs of the Canberra community. Existing community facility buildings may be used for a range of uses that are not normally permitted in order to ensure short term efficient use of buildings no longer needed for the purpose for which they were built. Supportive housing, indoor recreation facilities and outdoor recreation facilities may also be permitted where it can  e demonstrated the land is no longer needed to meet needs for other community facilities”.
[Territory Plan, Page 1 of Part B4]

The Hall Village Precinct was entered in the Heritage Place register in August 2001. As well as being subject to general provisions of listing as a heritage place, the school site is designated as being subject to the additional specific requirements of clauses (k) to (o) of Conservation Objectives 4.2 and 4.3. These pertain particularly to the landscape setting, and the character and location of any new buildings on the site.

 [Village of Hall Master Plan, p. 48, May 2002]

There are twelve buildings on the site of which seven are demountable. The buildings include the headmasters cottage, which has been used for meetings of community groups such as the Progress Association, in return for the school enjoying free access to the Hall Pavilion. There is also a multi-purpose sports court, which was intended to be a school / community shared facility. 

Also amongst the school buildings is the original school building of 1911, now the Laurie Copping Heritage Centre, which operates as a museum. There is also a ‘Peace Tree’, which was planted by the pupils in 1918, and a substantial standard of mature pine trees which encloses the whole site.

In his ‘statement of reasons’ for closing the school, Minister Barr stated that “the cost of upgrading Hall PS to the [standard required] for all other ACT schools is $145, 000”.  No details were given however.

Heritage status of the site and buildings

The Hall Village Precinct was placed on the Heritage Places Register in August 2001, with the following conservation policy:

‘The intrinsic features of the Hall Village Precinct should be managed in a manner appropriate to conserve its historical significance as  a rural village predating the Territory, and conserve the natural, aesthetic and Aboriginal values of its landscape setting’ (p.5)

Conservation Objective 1.1 (d) refers specifically to the school site:

‘The historical intent for Sections 6 and 7 to constitute a central landscaped reserve within the village should  be retained through the retention of the Hall Reserve (Block 15 Section&) as landscaped open space, and the conservation and enhancement of landscape at the Hall Public School (Block 3 Section 6) and St Michaels and All Angels (Block 2 Section 6)’.

The Primary School is identified as a ‘Place of specific value’, and is subject, as such, to the additional specific requirements of Conservation Objective 4 :

•	To minimise the loss of the historical integrity of the precinct through total demolition of original historic buildings
•	To retain the historical form and architectural character of the original historic buildings as perceived from the street or adjacent public domain.
•	To retain the landscape setting of individual historic places plus individual historic plantings and minor built features (pp 10-11)

Objective 4.3 (o) requires that:

Built structures and archeological remains from the early period of village development (pre-1960), plus monuments, shall be conserved in a manner appropriate to their historic and social value (p. 11).

Of the present school buildings, we believe that only three date from earlier than 1960, and that only the original school building of 1911 merits conservation.  1.1 (d) implies some constraints on the scale of any new development. It is clearly intended that the open landscape setting of Sections 6 and 7 be conserved.

Given that the community has been strongly supportive of heritage recognition for the village, but recognizing the possibility that new users may have to be found for the school site, we recommend that before any decision is made in relation to new uses of the site, the Government commissions a Conservation Plan for Sections 6 and 7, which would examine in more detail the requirements for conservation of this central area of the village.

Village of Hall and District Progress Association
October 2007
ATTACHMENT A

As well as developing the case for re-opening the school, and leaving the site intact meanwhile, we have considered a range of alternative possible future uses. This should be read as contingency planning, against the possibility that at some stage, the primary school option is definitively ruled out.

Alternative possible options.

Those who responded to our survey canvassed a wide range of alternative possible uses for the site. Our conclusion from a review of these is that if the goal of re-opening the primary school were ever to be abandoned – then the village would be best served by  a ‘multi-use’ solution  incorporating aged persons accommodation, some elements of early childhood care and education, a community meeting place / activity centre, some public open space, and a heritage place showcasing the old school [Option (5) below]

1.	‘Hall Community Park / Village Square’

Hall Community Park gives emphasis to the land, and landscape, rather than to the built structures.  The dominant usage would become public open space – a landscaped ‘garden’ or ‘park’ of the kind typically found close to the centre of many Australian towns and villages.  Any new structures would be at a minimum.

In the case of Hall such a Park could be developed in conjunction with revitalization of the Hall Reserve on the other side of Victoria Street – a substantial  area of public open space with seriously deteriorating tree cover. It could emphasise and enhance the main heritage elements of the site - the old school building and the trees. It could retain a few of the current buildings for such community activities as a Pre-school and community meeting room.

Advantages:

•	Conserves the current open space and landscape character of the village
•	Requires little if any additional building.
•	If agreed to, could evolve and develop over a long period of time

Disadvantages:

•	On-going maintenance presents a serious challenge
•	No obvious, willing funder of such a ‘public good’ development
•	Would generate little additional commercial activity
•	Hall already has a park, and substantial open space.

2.	‘Seniors Settlement’

A third possible use is accommodation for aged persons. Various accommodation options were put forward – a migrants camp, backpackers accommodation, caravan park, student housing, a motel. Of these, aged persons accommodation seemed to us the most realistic. Of three levels of such accommodation – nursing home, hostel, and independent living units – the latter may be the most appropriate to Hall, as the others seem to require a larger scale to be viable.  Such a development could be undertaken by government, by the private sector, or by non-profit providers of aged care and accommodation. 

If 25% of the land were to be built on, this might allow for 35 – 45 cottage style units. It is conceivable that such a development could be designed with a specifically rural flavour and style, in a way that might appeal particularly to older people retiring from farming or other rural situations in surrounding NSW. It is possible that in association with any development of this sort, a significant investment could be made in associated landscaping and community facilities, such as an activity centre.

Advantages:

•	Brings an additional 50 -70 residents into the village who would support current community services and facilities.
•	Responds to a community need, including the ageing Hall population
•	Financially and organizationally sustainable

Disadvantages:

•	Loss of public open space in the centre of the village
•	Some increase in traffic and noise
•	Skews the demographics of the village towards seniors.

3.	Hall ‘Early Childhood Education and  Care Centre’

Parents involved wish to retain the existing Pre-school. There is a need for good quality, accessible play-group, play-school, and child-care facilities in the ACT, as elsewhere. There has been an increase recently in young families coming to the village. There is strong support in the community for continued use of the school site for the benefit of children and families of the village and district.

This fourth option envisages return of a Pre-school, or even the establishment of an Early Childhood School (P-2) augmented by child care provision. The latter envisages a commercial or community provider, possible in newly developed facilities, taking advantage of Hall’s position on the Barton highway entrance to the ACT, and proximity to Gungahlin and Belconnen. Such provision would have the attractiveness long association with Hall Primary – a safe and peaceful rural setting, with ease of access and car parking.  As it is unlikely that these facilities would need more that 10 -15% of the land available, this is a usage which is best thought of in combination with one of the other options, such as aged care accommodation, or a park.

In his letter to the Association the Ministers says: ”Your advice in relation to the intention of the Pre School parents Association to continue as an organisation with a view to re-opening operations in 2008 has been confirmed by the Department of Education and Training. Accordingly the evaluation of the Hall school site will continue to recognize the on-gong need for a preschool to operate from the site”.

Advantages:

•	Existing Pre-school building and resources and related Parents organisation
•	Strong community support for keeping childhood education and care  on the site
•	Can be combined easily with other potential users of the site
•	Brings business to Hall enterprises

Disadvantages:

•	Need to demonstrate that there is a demand for child care and pre-school provision at Hall

4.	Canberra and Region Heritage Centre

Finally,  one respondent puts forward a proposal that the site be developed into a ‘Heritage Centre’ for Canberra and the region. This is an intriguing idea. It would need the support of the ACT Government to get off the ground. We include it here so that community support for such a concept can be gauged.

“My general idea is to reserve and then develop the Hall school site for a major facility called (for the moment) the "Canberra and Region Heritage Centre". 

A proposal for a Canberra and Region Heritage Centre could encompass the history, heritage and character of the ACT in conjunction with the adjoining areas of NSW, the location of Hall as one of the main entry points from NSW into the ACT, and the character of Hall as an eminently suitable place for such a facility.

……..a Centre which could become a major attraction and information place, with additional facilities for community use. It should also be a place that the ACT Government feels that it must have, because of the consequent benefits for the ACT”.

Establishment, and maintenance of such a centre would seem to us to require significant on-going commitments from government(s)

5.  A multi-purpose solution?

It is the Association’s view that the best solution might be a combination of some of the above options. A mixture of use types would attract differing groups of users and changing daily, weekly and annual patterns of usage. This would assist the flow of movement to and from the village – of relatives, customers, service providers, and so on.

We are particularly attracted to a multi-purpose solution which could combine aged persons independent living accommodation with a centre for early childhood education and care, in a manner that both preserved the heritage values of the site, and retained some public open space.  A development along these lines might also incorporate an activity centre / meetings room accessible to the community.  This multi-purpose solution would need to also incorporate a heritage component, and elements of landscaped public open space.  We believe that a mixed development along such lines is perfectly feasible.

A complex of this sort should be designed with leading edge water, waste disposal and energy systems, and help anchor the long term viability of the village. The whole of section 6 and Block 15 Section 7 (the Hall Reserve) should be incorporated into the planning for any such development of this sort.

VHDPA
October 2007

7