Although attempts would ultimately be unsuccessful, there were many campaigns set up to try and persuade Birmingham City Council to consider reusing the library building. Proposals such as an art gallery, an architecture centre, a hotel, museum, offices, a school of music or acting and a trade centre were all rejected (Keep The Ziggurat, 2013).
As part of the many attempts to save the library, a petition was set up. Many participants gave personal and rational reasons to save the library. The petition and their comments can be viewed via the link below:
As part of the many attempts to save the library, a petition was set up. Many participants gave personal and rational reasons to save the library. The petition and their comments can be viewed via the link below:
This infographic shows these points favouring reuse:
BIRMINGHAM CENTRAL LIBRAY
Birmingham Central Library was designed by architect John Madin, a pioneer of post-war architecture in Birmingham. The library was opened in 1974, but by 2013 it had been replaced by the new Library of Birmingham and its doors were closed forever. The destruction of the library has now begun - with it, a piece of Birmingham's heritage.
This case study will explore and analyse the attempts to reuse of the library and the reasons cited for demolition, which sealed the fate of the library. These will be analysed to determine the loss of identity that Birmingham will incur through the demolition of the library.
The library has had a short but interesting life. The link below will take you to a timeline of the building's history:
CASE STUDY 2-LOSS OF IDENTITY:
REASONS BEHIND DEMOLITION:
REASONS FOR REUSE:
THE REPLACEMENT:
ANALYSIS:
LIBRARY OF BIRMINGHAM:
PARADISE BIRMINGHAM:
If Birmingham had a heart, then this is it. The library, with roots in the Boston Civic Centre and Le Corbusier's La Tourette, is a good example of modern civic architecture. Set on the highest side of the multi-level square, it helps form the enclose while retaining its own identity (Clawley, 2015, p23).
By this standard, the Central Library started where most other Birmingham buildings stop. Here was a masterpiece in front of our eyes, and yet every influential person in Birmingham has colluded in pulling it down (Clawley, 2015, p8).
The library of Birmingham opened in 2013. In a video released during the design stages of the library, architect Francine Houben describes how the new library will have its own identity while bringing the identities of the surrounding buildings together:
Paradise Birmingham is due for completion on 2026. The scheme has been widely criticised and described as a "generic multi-million-pound scheme of offices and retail" (Failedarchitecture.com , 2016).
The library has achieved international recognition for its architectural and historical significance, At the start of his outline of European Architecture, Sir Nikolaus Pevsner defines the greatest achievement of architecture as being its spatial qualities:
In a preface written about the Royal Institute of British Architects in Murray and Trumbley's architectural guide, Norman Foster wrote a passage about the Central Library in its Chamberlain Place setting:
The library was loved and loathed in equal measure and there were also campaigns to see it demolished. Prince Charles famously described the library as a 'place where books are incinerated, not kept' (Failedarchitecture.com, 2016).
In his book about the library, Clawley concludes:
Whatever the merits of John Madin's Central Library, the story of its life leads to no other conclusion that its fate was sealed because it had the misfortune to stand on a plot of land, known as Paradise Circus, that had become greatly desired by a commercial property developer. To bolster the case Birmingham City Council cited many faults - red herrings - that were untrue or not fatal in themselves but together created an impression that the building was beyond redemption (Clawley, 2015, p10).
The value to the property developer, the neglect by the council as well as economic incentives lead to the demise of the library, These points are expanded in this infrographic:
Despite protest, structural demolition of the library began in late 2015. The library's certificate from immunity from listing expires on the 10th of January 2016 and a new application has been submitted (C20society.org.uk, 2015)
In order to access the impact the loss of the Central Library will have on the city, it is interesting to understand its replacement.
Video 4
[The Library of Birmingham] will give identity to the city and even give identity to the people of the city and I want to show something of the proud history of the city in the building....The idea is to put three palazzos next to each other, so you have Baskerville House which is from the 20s-30s, then there is The REP, the theatre which is from the 60s, and in between will be the library. Every building has its own identity of a certain period, I think it's our task to bring all these periods together, from the last century for the next century (Library of Birmingham, 2009).
Video 5
It is evident from understanding proposals that were put forward for the reuse of the library that it could have been successfully adapted to serve a new function. Reasons citied to demolish conclude that the building unfortunately stood on a high value plot of land in the city centre and it's 'failure', due to the council's neglect, was very convenient.
The petition to save the library shows that its presence is engrained in the memory and identity of many local residents and its loss will effect this.
The proposal for Paradise Circus does not enhance the identity of the local area or of Birmingham as a whole, whereas the library is representative of the uprising of post-war Birmingham and how it recovered following the Birmingham Blitz. Its demolition removes a key symbol of Birmingham's heritage and identity and this 'layer' of its history which future generations will not be able to see.
In conclusion, the identity of the library and its representations have not been considered in the decision to demolish it. Instead, these decisions are entirely financial based. It is highly likely that future generations will look back on its demolition with shame, just as we do now when we see the Central Library's Victorian predecessor.