The Amelia Scott Cultural and Learning Hub in Tunbridge Wells

The Amelia Scott is a cultural and learning hub in Tunbridge Wells, named after a local suffragist. It reopened in 2022 after a transformation costing £21 million - jointly funded by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council and Kent County Council, with the backing of The National Lottery Heritage Fund and Arts Council England. It provides 41,774 square feet of public space including a library, museum, art gallery, archives, Tunbridge Wells Borough Council’s Gateway, Kent County Council’s register office, the Tourist Information Centre and Kent Adult Education centre.

The flagship regeneration project - which coincided with the coronavirus pandemic - updated two Grade II-listed buildings to meet modern-days standards and doubled the amount of space for displaying historic objects. Facilities include a new ground floor pottery studio, as well as textile and silversmithing facilities and a digital suite for the creation of short films, videos and other digital art.

Here Jeremy Kimmel, Arts Heritage and Engagement Director, answers questions about the redesign, how the project went - and the difference it has made since completion.

1. When did the building originally open and what was it used for pre-renovation?

The building as it is now was originally two buildings. One was opened in 1905 as an electrical college, which later became a boys school and was then converted into an adult education centre. The other was a purpose built library and museum - construction on the project started in the late 1930s as part of a larger civic centre project including a town hall, theatre and police station. However due to the war, each part of the development was completed at different times - and the library/museum building wasn’t actually finished until 1956. That meant that it’s basement was used as a bomb shelter locally, but also that parts of it weren’t finished to quite the same high standard as others due to the strained public finances after the war.

2. What was the building’s condition pre-renovation?

They were functional, but they weren’t in a great state. Both buildings were plagued by leaks, poorly insulated and were a patchwork of attempts to make them accessible. The back of the buildings was almost entirely unused and thus had become a dumping ground for pallets, bricks and was overgrown with weeds. The areas used for museum collection storage weren’t up to modern standards, so there were concerns about the safety of our historic collections and archives. It just wasn’t built for modern life.

3. What was the thinking behind the project - and locating library, gallery, museum and Adult Education Centre in one building?

It was widely acknowledged that something needed to be done with the site. A redevelopment had originally been floated as a millennium project but was unsuccessful - so the idea had been floating around for some time before work actually began. In part the thinking was based on the diversity of services which inhabited the buildings originally - but what really pushed it to new heights was wanting to make the most of the opportunity redevelopment gave. Others had co-located services, but no one had blended them the way the Amelia was going to - library, museum, gallery, tourist information and Council front-line services all being offered by the same integrated team was something that hadn’t been done before. It presented a lot of challenges, but it also presented a lot of opportunities and helped develop new ways of thinking.

4. What was the design brief - in summary?

The vision of the Hub is of a rich and vibrant mix of museum, library, creative arts and community activities and space, overlapping and working together seamlessly to create a powerful and engaging experience for customers, visitors and learners, at the centre of a wider sphere of influence including the High Weald and beyond. The aim is to engage a local community audience as well as a wider and national audience of visitors, researchers, and learners.

The model is based on a synergy between Museum, Library and Adult Learning, bringing in local visitor information, community services, creative business and arts organisations, to create a cultural magnet in the town for local people, businesses, and visitors from the surrounding region and nationally.

5. How did you manage to design spaces for a combination of Museum, Library and Archive in an integrated way?

This was something of a two-fold process. In principle it’s easy to just put museum style display cases in a library space, but that wouldn’t necessarily make people look at or engage with them. To do this effectively, the team thought first of what a user would want out of a space - the experience of people visiting and utilising services was always priority one. The second key component was throwing out convention - the team knew the requirements well enough that anything which was simply ‘just the way it’s done’ was thrown away and the focus was always on how to get to the desired goal with the resources that were available. Once those two factors were in place it became fairly straightforward.

6. What were the major changes made?

There were a few major structural changes to the site as part of the redevelopment process. Many internal walls were removed within the old library/museum building, and several areas were extended to make room for the creation of a highly secure temporary exhibition space, and a new archive vault. The two previously unconnected buildings were joined together via a large infill - the first floor being a 12m barrel vaulted space. The 1905 building was kept largely similar to it’s original design, save for the addition of a lift and the uncovering of an original stained glass window which had been previously covered up. The outside space to the rear of the building was landscaped to become a usable courtyard garden, allowing the new café to spill out into the space in the warmer months.

7. How did the project go?

The project went well, but it was also beset by larger problems which surrounded the capital works - in particular Brexit and the associated price rises and the limited availability of certain materials as well as the lockdowns of the COVID-19 pandemic. It took an attitude of flexibility and a desire to see it done no matter what to get it over the line - and a team of dedicated cultural professionals to help it operate at such a high level.

8. Have visitor numbers increased since reopening in April 2022?

Yes, visitor figures prior to the redevelopment were taken in very different ways so it is difficult to be entirely accurate. However, the target number of visitors for 3 years of being operational was 450,000 - which we surpassed after a year and a half. We are presently (2025) looking at around 330,000 for the year - and hopefully seeing our millionth visitor this summer.

9. Has feedback been positive?

Feedback has indeed been positive - we presently have a 98% customer satisfaction rating from feedback surveys we undertake regularly. In our first year of opening there were definitely some voices who preferred the old way of displaying the heritage objects - it hadn’t really changed a great deal in 50 years and it definitely had it’s fans. But over the years we have seen more and more people really accepting us and people keep coming back time and again. So we must be doing something right!

10. Have there been any surprises - good or bad - in terms of usage?

The biggest surprise in terms of usage has been actually just how quickly people accepted us. We knew that what we were building was good and right, but I don’t think even we anticipated the level of response we’ve had from the community - they’re voting with their feet. There have been some places we thought would be more heavily used, but that haven’t panned out that way - and we review that sort of thing regularly in order to adapt. It’s also just been great to see how many young people we get in our building in the afternoon and early evening. We seem to be something of a haven for them and we’re more than happy to play that role.

11. With hindsight, is there anything you would have done differently?

This is always a tricky question because of course there will be. I think communication in the early stages of the project was perhaps more disjointed than was ideal - there was a lot of staff movement in the first few years which meant it was hard to maintain a coherent vision and way of doing things. I would also not recommend trying to undertake a major capital project during a global pandemic - I wouldn’t do that again.

12. Is there anything else you want to say?

We feel strongly this represents a very resilient approach to delivering culture services for local authorities, and I believe we will be seeing a lot more facilities like this popping up around the country before too long.