Plans go in for William Salt Library

joshua

joshua

Well-Known Forumite
At last! Plans lodged for new Stafford history centre
By Richard Guttridge | Stafford | News | Published: Less than an hour ago

Multi-million pound plans for a history centre in Stafford have finally been lodged.


A7VV7UMM2VGL7EK5NCWDXUJCKE.jpg

The William Salt Library in Stafford, where a new history centre is planned
The ambitious scheme to create a history centre at the William Salt Library has been years in the making with fears over funding along the way.

But now official plans have gone in to Stafford Borough Council.

As part of the plans, part of the building would be demolished and replaced with a new three-storey extension, providing 550 sq m of visitor space.

A new exhibition space and reception will be built in the existing courtyard space between the records office and library building.

Part of a collection previously housed at Shugborough Hall will be moved to the William Salt Library along with records from Lichfield to create a history and archives centre under one roof, under plans.

Jonathan Price, who represents Stafford on the county council, said the new history centre would be a coup for the town.

He said: “There is a massive amount of history in Stafford and so much to tell.”

Heritage officials are keen to showcase the county’s rich history, with work on expanding the Eastgate Street library due to begin next year.


The plans, potentially worth £4m, have been revealed by Staffordshire County Council and the William Salt Library Trust.

It is hoped the project will boost visitor numbers to the town.

Council chiefs said the centre would create ‘imaginative and exciting ways to connect Staffordshire people and their stories’ and ‘share the stories of Staffordshire and its people’.

The library itself will also undergo a minor refurbishment and be incorporated into the new Staffordshire History Centre.

An initial approach to Heritage Lottery has been successful and with the body indicating it would be ready to support the project, a formal bid is being prepared.
 
G

Gareth

Well-Known Forumite
Plans are decent. Knocking down that ugly building at the back for a rebuild.

Will significantly improve the north walls entrance as well with trees being planted in that area
 
S

SCFC12

A few posts under my belt
Someone at the council doesn't have an appreciation of place making, sight lines or signposting. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. To save money the front of the building looks nothing like the original plans because they whole frontage has been value engineered and is now strangely fitting around one rental property that they have decided not to knock down and presumably maintain an income from. So the front is actually split. The problem is that because of that the whole frontage doesn't have any sort of impact - you dont see it from down the street, it doesnt have a "look at me, i'm over here, come and visit me" frontage that advertises it to people who dont know it is there. It looks like a few houses cobbled together that if you blink you would miss it and people will have no idea how good the work done behind that frontage is. If you got rid of that one house and had a proper frontage that was more inviting and more obvious - rather than a gloomy tunnel where you have to walk round a corner to a museum (quite arrogantly really - "i'm great people will just come"). It already isnt a 'pop in' kind of place and so will lose any passing/curiosigty trade for it's lovely looking tea/coffee shop which it could so easily have capitalized on as a secondary income if better positionned) - THEN with more organic visitors you would have made more money from it as a viabkle long term feature of a museum than you would if you keep that lone house because more people will come through the door and you have a more finished product that has the entrance and grandeur it deserves. More people visiting = long term success and less need to constantly remind people where it is. All this led by value engineering unfortunately but is a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. You can have the best museum in the world but if its in a tunnel round a corner no one will be drawn into it to use it, they will just walk on by and no one will ever drive past and go "ooh whats that". Surely the shire hall would make a better museum anyway - but that's a different argument!
Its like the tipping street council buildings. The labour council bought superdrug specifically to knock it down and generate a nice big T shaped high street junction and really open up the walking route from the high street through and past the new council building's shops and then over to the new riverside. This would have created a lovely wide piazza style link where direct sight-lines were obtained to the shopping complex from the existing high street - ADDING to the highstreet and not competing with it as it does now as it would have all been one long parcel of shops/cafes generating footfall in both directions, with the new centre at one end and the guildhall at the other. People walking down the high street would see the new shops and be naturally drawn to them. Sightlines. Otherwise if you are from out of town people would just use one or the other and would just keep walking past what looks like a delivery road and have no idea that there are any shops there at all. Thats why there is now such a disconnect between the new part of town and the old. It wasnt planned to be like that originally - but when the conservatives came in they promised to save money and said they would keep superdrug as a rental income generator. The short sightedness of this value engineering resulted in cost savings but less footfall / sightlines / no new wide natural walking route whci is why there was no uptake on the new Tipping Street shops that were out of the way and no longer on a main walking artery as planned. The money the council lost in rental over those empty years (before they have basically given the leases away) would a) have paid for the superdrug purchase/demolition anyway and b) given a better less disjointed town centre for all people that live here and maybe a more hardy highstreet. the library would still be in the shire hall, because they wouldnt have needed to fill a unit in Tipping Street out of embarrassment, and the rates/rental incomes from the others would have been far higher than they currently are due to them being on what would have been an extension to the high street and a hugely increased footfall. All very shortsighted im afraid - but allowed someone in both cases to go "look everyone... im saving tax payers money" ...but you arent in the long term though are you.... And at what cost to the actual quality of the project,. Ignore the figures but to describe it better - if they are going to do it anyway I'd rather they spent £4M on a fantastic project for future generations over spending £3.8M on something that is not right, rubbish and doomed to failure/further loss making. £4M well spent for a quality asset.. or £3.8M for a waste of money that doesnt work.
 
Last edited:
Withnail

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
Thehooperman said:
... your text is confusing!!!
Click to expand...
It's been a while since we've had a proper Wall-o-Text as well.

I'm not quite sure what we're against here apart from .2 of a million pounds - though tbf i'm muddling through here with an 8" screen and a tippety-tap-type sort of scenario.
 
S

SCFC12

A few posts under my belt
Gareth said:
WTF
Click to expand...
Yep - probably best not to start writing things like that the morning after a "long lunch". There's no editing that now, its passed!
There were some valid points to be fair but lets just write this one off!
 
Last edited:
1JKz

1JKz

Well-Known Forumite
Open Day (on the 15th) was good, interesting and informative.
Lottery Heritage Fund thing decision to be made on the 25th!

Fingers crossed.
 
M

markpa12003

Well-Known Forumite
SCFC12 said:
Yep - probably best not to start writing things like that the morning after a "long lunch". There's no editing that now, its passed!
There were some valid points to be fair but lets just write this one off!
Click to expand...

I agree with your post. There is a disconnect from the high street and the new riverside complex, as well as others in Stafford because of a lack of signposting and sightlines.

The acid test for me is if you drop a stranger in the middle of market square would they be able to find the riverside complex; St Mary's Church; William Salt library etc.

Because of years of bad planning the council have created a series of alley ways off the high street and rear 'looking' service yards that make it difficult for newbys to navigate around.

My ideal solution - bull doze the ugly Superdrug, McDonalds Building and Tipping Street Education officers. The loss of these buildings will have a positive impact on the street scene and improve the high street.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top