Sydney's Mitchell Library Reading Room should be kept as a place of books and readers and intellectual exchange, not transformed into a social hub, writes Evelyn Juers.

Books are in crisis. Who needs them these days? Already they're beginning to seem quaint; pragmatists would ditch them altogether. Libraries are facing new demands on storage, utility, technology, cost, and public image.

It's a global phenomenon, a sign of the times. And it's being tackled in various ways.

In Canada, the Library Association has shown great concern about its government's reckless closing down of libraries, and the dumping of books and staff.

In New York, the Public Library Renovation Plan was stopped in its tracks by what's been called a firestorm of protest. There were rallies, petitions, and lawsuits, and New Yorkers saved their library from destruction: they argued that "you don't update a masterpiece" (Ada Louise Huxtable).

In its audacious synthesis of space and function, Seattle's flashy Central Library, designed by Rem Koolhaas and Joshua Prince-Ramus, is held up as an architectural and civic success story. But it also has its critics; some find it confusing, others regret its lack of intimacy.

Closer to home, at Sydney University's re-jigged Fisher library, the chic toilets and lounge chairs don't compensate for the removal of books. It's not easy for libraries to get it right.

The grand old Mitchell wing of the State Library of NSW is a treasure house of Australian books, maps, newspapers and magazines, documents, manuscripts, photographs and ephemera - a very special place. But the harbingers of change argue that Mitchell is a bit stuffy and that it offers too little public space: it is due for a make-over.

Late in 2013, the library held a meeting to discuss its readiness to meet the challenges of populist trends in the digital age: with a $25 million renovation project. Over five years, in three-stages, this will be financed with private donations (yet to be raised) and a little help from the government. People who attended the announcement say it was not widely publicised and the plan was presented as a fait accompli.

It has been argued that less than 10 per cent of people entering the State Library are readers and scholars - the rest go there to eat lunch, escape the rain, use the internet. The new plans for Mitchell are for a mixed-use space, including a large lecture hall, a children's education area, galleries for the library's collection of art and objects, and a rooftop restaurant with sweeping views.

The hapless 10 per cent of bona fide readers and scholars are being exiled to the refurbished Friends' Room. We're being shipped out because our shrine of learning and discovery, where we snuck peanuts from our pockets, consulted the OED on "snuck" vs "sneaked", researched, dreamed, wrote ... our magnificent Mitchell Reading Room is to be opened to the public. In fact, it is already a public institution. But they're redefining "library", "open" and "public": they want to create a friendlier, less bookish space to bring in larger numbers of visitors. To make money it will also be available for special events; there's plans for a carpark to be built under the Botanical Gardens.

To gain more space, they'll open up the underground book storage areas. It means that many (most?) books will need to be housed off-site and delivery will be slower. Thus the kind of research that depends on the spontaneity of ideas and flicking between volumes will be curbed.

The Library tries to persuade employees that their plans are good and it'll be a cinch to implement them. They say the "improvements" will provide "clients" with a more "centralised service"; cuts are called "clarifications"; opponents of the scheme are sidelined as "traditionalists", and in any case, we're told the changes are all in response to "public demand". Really? Who among the public has demanded this?

All reference books and card catalogues have already been relocated next door, to a small glassed-in area of the State Reference Library. I've been told there are some books left behind in the upper Gallery, and on Level 2 they've kept duplicate copies of digitised or not very popular things, such as 20th-century literary criticism, to fill in the blank spaces.

The State Reference Library is now over-crowded with books and people. Service points have been reduced by half. As I understand it, there has been minimal consultation with library staff, many of whom are critical of the current changes. They've been told not to speak with the public about the renovations, in case criticism impacts on funding. Staff numbers continue to be cut, or they're asked to accept reduced pay. Clearly, there's a crisis.

Let's show faith in the significance of Australian culture and one of its oldest and greatest symbols of learning, by keeping an underused Mitchell Library Reading Room as a place of books and readers and intellectual exchange. Let's improve it, by all means, but let's not transform it into a hub. We urgently need to have a more open discussion about the future of Sydney's Mitchell Library before it's too late.

Evelyn Juers is an essayist and biographer and co-publisher of Giramondo books. View her full profile here. She is one of a number of authors who have organised a petition regarding the proposed changes to the Mitchell Library.