Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Experts in Wills, Trusts
& Estate Planning

Down come the trees at McGregor Hall

By qedbynature - 31 August 2010 35

[First filed: Aug 30, 2010 @ 8:13]

With the ink barely dry on the government decision to override any planning objections at McGregor Hall, the ANU has wasted no time in bringing down the trees, some of which were provisionally listed with the Tree Conservator.

Of course it’s the sort of work you would do on a Sunday afternoon when no-one was looking…

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
35 Responses to
Down come the trees at McGregor Hall
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Holden Caulfield 10:17 pm 19 Sep 10

All gone.

stonedwookie 8:07 am 01 Sep 10

@sepi want a box of tissues?
This should be good for the city the hall looked like Sh1t good riddance!

Grail 12:37 am 01 Sep 10

harvyk1: I’d be interested to hear how you plan to manage a community hall without any hire fees?

sepi 3:41 pm 31 Aug 10

It isn’t the physical condition of the building, so much as the unique amenity:

– close to civic / public transport
– not close to any residential
– reasonable hire rates for community groups / bands / dance classes etc.

Now that this hall is gone, there is no replacement option for these groups.

H1NG0 1:15 pm 31 Aug 10

Rosencrantz said :

I’m having a bit of trouble understanding the love for this building. I walked past yesterday and as far as I can tell, it is little more than a fibro shack. We want something like this occupying a prominent position in our CBD? Really?

Its not the fact that it is a crappy shack, its the fact that something is being knocked or cut down. As soon as you mention that, no matter what it is, the NIMBYs and Greenies will always complain.

p1 11:15 am 31 Aug 10

sepi said :

once it has residential above it becomes impossible to have bands etc performing.

They could actually go to the trouble of some decent soundproofing…. Or put the community space on the top floor…

p1 9:38 am 31 Aug 10

harvyk1 said :

I personally believe that the benchmark should be set at how unique is the building? Fibro shacks where \ are a dime a dozen, which is why so many temporary ones where built during Canberra’s construction. There is nothing special from a historical point of view as far as I am concerned (and I’m not alone in that thinking)

I would say that the more common something was way-back-when, the more potential for heritage value it will have in the future. If there were millions of something, then when there is only on left it will be all the more important then if there had been only one all along. Question is, do we want to preserve one in a nice location that people are using daily? Or a crappy one located somewhere random with the distinction on being something no one could even be bothered knocking over?

sepi 9:32 am 31 Aug 10

once it has residential above it becomes impossible to have bands etc performing.

Rosencrantz 9:29 am 31 Aug 10

I’m having a bit of trouble understanding the love for this building. I walked past yesterday and as far as I can tell, it is little more than a fibro shack. We want something like this occupying a prominent position in our CBD? Really?

JessP 9:20 am 31 Aug 10

I suggested this previously and I will do so again:

In the loss of McGregor Hall, why can any lucky developer provide community space of equal size in the new building?? Then all those people and clubs who were regular users of McGregor hall would still have the opportunity to continue in the same locale?

From what has been commented here so far the old MCgregor hall has a steady clientele…a developer could keep the community on side and make some $$ (OK not a huge amount but what the heck).

Thumper 8:53 am 31 Aug 10

#23 and #24 are right on the money.

It must be pointed out that the place is not significant in any way, shape or form under the Burra Charter which is the ultimate guide for all Australian built heritage. However, it is hugely significant in that it was a community hall that was greatly used and will be greatly missed when it’s gone.

Surely if the site is raking in millions for the Stanhope government then there can be some crumbs to provide a like facility in a similiar area, ie, inner canberra.

Mr Stanhope? Any comments? Angry voice perhaps?

Pandy 6:33 am 31 Aug 10

JohnBoy you are right. It was still being used a lot. It was central, it has reasonable hiring fees.

So Stanhope, where the bloody hell is our replacement?

caf 12:27 am 31 Aug 10

Johnboy is correct and bitzermaloney is full of the proverbial – the hall has been booked solid for at least the last 5 years.

qedbynature 10:47 pm 30 Aug 10

sure it’s an ugly fibro shack in the eyes of some, to others its a mighty handy community hall and piece of history. Despite plenty of support for a prominent local historian and the National Trust, the local Heritage Council (possibly under a fair bit of pressure) would not list the place on their register and the planning minister decided to over-ride any other planning restraints by calling-in the development.

David Lamont had plenty of reasons to feel smug about it.

But why stop there? Obviously there is now so much popular support for redeveloping all the old parts of Canberra we could have a redevelopment led recovery. We could keep building stuff and knocking it down every few years and the concrete trucks would never be idle. Oh wait, that’s already happening…

Well at least we know we can trust the government to act.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site