Future site use

There are 2 preferred options in the report. 1a (revised) preserves most of the site for community uses and (importantly)retains the open space that commects with the oval providing a green corridor that could be used to significantly enhance recreation in the area.

What a pity that the recommendation seems to be to go with 3a(revised) which sees a retirement development in an area with plenty of existing retirement accommodation.

I dont know anyone who is for this approach.

This is the community's land and should be used for the community to enjoy. Some have suggested off leash dog walking areas and others community forest. All agree it should be retained as open space.

By the way the summarty table is misleading. It appears to suggest no development on the site. If I had not read the detail of the report I would have missed the true intentions.

These are classic urban infill sites, put low cost housing on them all; this is a chance to do something about fixing Canberras housing affordability problem.

People always compain about government taxes and charges and then complain when they try to minimise them by realizing their assets.

These sites are not needed as schools so they should maximise the return and do some social good as well with low cost houing.

I do agree with Crossy (above) that retirement stuff is a bad idea. This is really an attempt to make development look community minded. Low cost housing should be for all.

Once you relinquish the land it is gone forever. The report states that Holt has below the Belconnen average green space although still acceptable levels. The people have spoken, they prefer option 1a, open community space.

Why humour us with ANOTHER round of consultations and I quote from the report:

"The community should be involved in the planning process and especially have the opportunity for input into the discussions about the form and density of development."

for something no one wants anyway.

The government obviously has its agenda and regardless of any 'consultation', will press on with what it wants to do. They want to develop, and they are determined to do so. The feedback in the Holt report clearly states that the community wants it completely retained for community use, and if that is not possible, use it for an independant school. Development of the site came a very distant third in regards to preferred options. If the site was sold/rented to an independant private school, the open space would be kept, the private school would maintain the grounds beautifully and the community would have access to the buildings and grounds,the buildings would be maintained and the government would still make money. I know that the Government said they 'wouldn't sell to a private school' but if the community isn't against it...why not?! It's not like they haven't gone back on promises before (eg ACT Dragway), why get all pious on us now! Does anyone else support the rental/sale of the site to an independant school? I do!

So,in the wash up, what were the school closures really all about?

Selling the land to developers! However, they couldn't say that upfront so they just pretended to have community consultation over the last two years while their agenda was already fixed.

However - there are new 2006 statistics available now and the number of children in the 0-4 years age bracket has gone up. AND, this isn't counting all the children born since 2006 and the new West Macgregor development.

The site needs to be retained intact for community use and this is what the community wants.

I feel the site should be left as green open space for the whole suburb to enjoy and not as high density, low cost housing. I believe that the area would receive more benefit from leaving it as a community area.

I would say if the Holt site is to be used for housing there is not much that can be done to stop it. I would however say that this is a good chance for the ACT Government to show its "Green credentials". Maybe all of the new dwellings could have rain water tanks and solar hot water heaters. Perhaps even solar panels. Throw in a some piping for grey water use on gardens that will turn the area and the oval into a green oasis. I could live with that.

I have been a labor voter all my life. My parents were labor voters ad I have always voted labor.Always.

This ACT government has changed all that. They appear to just bulldoze over any issue that they want by pretending to listen, then do what they want anyway. They do not listen to anything put before them. This Holt issue is a classic example. The vast majority of comments on this forum and at public meetings, when asked what they think should be done with the space after the school closure ( funnily enough, the school is never mentioned in any literature), agree that it should be retained as a public space. Do this government listen? No. They have always planned to sell the land and cram in as many dwellings as possible and make as much money as possible. Wasting our time and money with pretend consultations so that they can justify their actions.

As I said, I am a Holt resident and firmly believe that the land adjacent to the CLOSED SCHOOL ( didn't close any in Yarralumla did they?) should be keep as a green, public space.

Sadly, this government is so bad it has taken a lifelong labor voter and left them with nothing to believe in.

I must have been at a different meeting on 4 July - I thought that retaining the site for a school or educational use was rated very highly by a number of the tables but it doesn't feature in the summary at all! So maybe the summary only reflects the comments that the Government is going to be prepared to hear

I am concerned by a couple of things in the "Community Forum Outcomes".

1) The layout seems designed to accentuate the "appropriate" uses, and de-emphasise the inappropriate uses. Each appropriate use gets its own bullet point, including HOUSING, whereas on the inappropriate side housing is just one of many. I feel this grossly misrepresents the depth of feeling AGAINST housing on the site, compared to the number of people who supported it.

It does seem that everyone's views were captured, but that no weighting was applied - there is no distinction between cases where one person supported an idea or 20 people supported it. I hope this will be captured in a more comprehensive report.

2) I don't recall any acknowledgement of Holt being a "lower socio-economic area". That seems ot be paving the way for throwing in cheap housing.

AshleyP's philanthropy is admirable, however I would ask where they live ? Are they a Holt resident ? How close to the school do they live ? Will they be directly impacted by the development, or will they just get a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that a problem has been solved without any inconvenience to them ?

I wonder if the Government is reading this site. Doubt it...which is a clever tactic really. We are all dutifully making our comments on this website, which is tucked away out of the view of the public. By putting it here and not in the papers, the ACT community is not seeing that there are people who care about this issue.

Maybe we should post here but also make sure we keep on writing to the papers as well?

We attended the 3 July forum at Kippax. At that meeting the case for allowing an independent school to take-over the Holt site and utilise the existing school building was advocated. Those present agreed, indeed enthusiastically, that such a solution would not only maintain but improve the amenity and security of the site. A suggestion that the site be shared by the independent school and a 'Men's Shed'facility was overwhelmingly supported by spontaneous applause. The precis displayed of the meeting's submissions ignores the case put forward for an independent school. Neither does it record that the meeting much preferred that the existing old and inadequate community buildings on site be replaced by a single new structure.

Lorraine & Donald Fraser.