Lottery turns down funding for GCR Museum

OK, I'll rephrase my question, how much land at B&B/Leicester North is 'in stock' for a museum? Did the plan using the HLF money involve acquiring more land than is currently available?

 

I think it is Council land and that there would have been some encroachment into the allotment area. There is a plan at http://www.gcrailway.co.uk/2017/06/great-central-museum-work-progress/

 

I'm aware of that plan, but that is for the scheme as envisaged with HLF funding. I'm wondering what land would be available if the scheme has to revert to plan B, whatever that is. Does the whole thing unravel because the land simply isn't available because it can't be afforded?

 

My assumption is that the Council was supplying the land. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether they were charging for it, and how much, but based on the mayor's comments, presumably they would be up for the same deal if funding can be found.

 

I can guess there was some confusion over whether the project was being done by Leicester Council, the GCR or the NRM and who would take responsibility for it (both in the building and long term running of it). It would seem that the GCR backed away from it a bit themselves realizing it was more that they could handle and tried to get the Council to take over the responsibility. For example would it have been classified as an NRM museum in the same way as York or Shildon, or was the NRM just loaning out a few exhibits ?

You check the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgrave_and_Birstall_railway_station "By late 1987, however, it seemed that through co-funding via Leicester City, who planned to build a museum 'Industrial village' adjacent to the site, a wholly new station to the south of Belgrave and Birstall would be built, requiring the removal of the existing platform"

so it seems the original station was demolished and the island platform removed and the line extended a bit to cross over the Council boundary into Leicester on the basis of some Leicester council; "airy fairy" museum scheme in 1987 and here in 2017, 30 years later and still no museum + the original genuine GCR station long gone for no benefit.

 

The original proposals were always said to be a partnership of the three organisations, with the NRM loaning exhibits. The intention of late was that Leicester to take the lead and a trust set up to take over the running of the Museum.

Belgrave and Birstall Station was heavily vandalised in the early 70s, despite the best efforts of a station group, a considerable proportion of the station buildings had to be demolished in 1977 as they were considered unsafe. The remaining building went in 1985, prior to the council Museum suggestion. The platform was removed in 1987 when Leicester North Station was constructed by the city council works department. It is difficult to see how the original Belgrave Station could have become a satisfactory terminus with its access problems.
During these times the GCR was hardly awash with cash and what scant resources they did have were being used to get the track laid to south of the Leicester Northern bypass or no bridge would have been built over the trackbed and they would not have been able get to Belgrave. I can imagine that Leicester’s offer concerning Leicester North Station offer was very welcome.
Although it is a great shame Belgrave and Birstall Station has long gone, perhaps a typical GCR station can be constructed in the future in place of the lottery design.

 

I don't personally fully understand why "Plan A" (grand-ish terminus GC style) was shelved for good? An underground main was mentioned as the reason it could never ever happen, but as they're replacing missing bridges and embankments in Loughborough, surely there is a solution to the main obstacle?

Instead of all this 10M super development, why not approach it Kidderminster style? Bit by bit, get a second platform in, then signalling, then slowly bit by bit create the retaining walls, buildings etc to create the optical illusion of an enclosed GC major station. Then a canopy to finish off. The Kidderminster glazed three sided station area is very impressive and a great atchievement but took a very long time.

Am I the only one that thinks that recreating a small 3 track chunk of somewhere like Nottingham Victoria would be the ultimate incarnation for Leicester North - it wouldn't be the ugly duckling of the railway then that's for sure, a relative cathedral to watch your engine run round in!

Sent from my HTC Desire 620 using Tapatalk

 

I have to agree with the philosophy of a 'bit by bit' phased approach to an overall master-plan, as funding becomes available. It's amazing what motivated volunteers can do over time, Broadway Station being a splendid example.

Andy

 

The original building at Leicester north was demolished because it was heavily vandalised and because more importantly the platform was in the county and the city the platform stretched over the city - county boundary line so 2 council tax rates would be paid the GCR did not want to pay 2 council tax rates

 

All the land for the museum has already been brought that's some of the allotments and the disused land next to it so we have the land all the surveys have been done so if you look on the platform you will see all the different colour markings to say where the utilities are the Arial survey had been done and there was plans iv'e seen them so there was work done

And if you looking at going to the space centre you would not go near there you would go to Abbey Lane sidings space centre / pumping station is a 5 - 10 minute walk from there and the cost of doing it would not be worth it for just another mile of track or so you would need to build a new bridge over the rind road thats 4 lanes and 3 other bridges but the old trackbed is protected and cant be built on so if someone has a few million it could be done and before the new station buildings was build we had to operate out of 2 mk1 carriages which was brought down each morning so that building is an improvement and yes the shutters don't look good but if there not there you wont have any windows the next day thats the area your in

 

Meanwhile, another attraction associated with the GCR gets ready to put in an application to the Heritage Lottery Fund.......
http://heritage-centre.co.uk/newsletters/dec-2017/

 

I wonder if this story in the telegraph was a factor in the decision ? Government review find that Britain should stop building new museums....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...building-new-museums-government-review-finds/

 

Very interesting. If so the HLF should have the balls to tell us.

 

Why?

PH

 

I think you are assuming a speed of action out of proportion to reality. It’s a review: there’s no obligation for any Government or other body to act on it, and even if subsequently they decide to do so, it takes time for an organisation like the HLF to evolve its funding priorities and policy. So I can’t imagine any connection between the the funding decision and the report.

Tom

 

Although I agree with the thrust of the argument in that spreading the money too thinly leaves the country with lots of mediocre museums which struggle and ultimately fail to make money/attract the visitors. The last thing the HLF should do is to waste money on such risky new schemes, is it not better to concentrate on the larger facilities such as the Tate Modern, British Museum or even the NRM at York and enhance those facilities that are already doing well?

 

Agreed, and I notice that the review proposes that the various government bodies create an action plan, meaning that policy is not yet set and will take time to form.

However, there has been repeated coverage of new museum and gallery failures, where heavy Lottery funding of the set-up has led to the creation of "white elephants" that have been unable to keep themselves going. That has reflected a long-running debate about the use of Lottery funds for new projects, but not operating costs.

If I, who am aware of this through a general interest in current affairs, am aware of this, I find it hard to believe that HLF would not be, and that the underlying thinking would not have influenced their thinking.

However, without knowing the details of what went between the promoters and HLF, it is impossible to know to what extent, if at all, this was part of what happened here. Given the strong reaction of Leicester City Council and the GCR to this decision, I have my doubts as to how much light there will be shed on the details of this decision.

 

I disagree; having visited all 3 in the not too distant past, they are already struggling for space for visitors, and in need of some relief - in part, what this particular project would have done for the NRM.

 

Yes the if money was made available more buildings/facilities could be built at York - problem solved, well not quite but you only need to look round to see the areas available not being used very well @York to see the lost opportunities. I do speak from the perspective of having worked (in a minor capacity) on the recent extensions etc at the British Museum on a very difficult site, enhancing the NRM @ York would be very easy in comparison.