This audit has been prepared by Report Kit 360 for the client named on the cover and may not be relied upon by any other party without our written agreement. The issue table above records every revision; the latest row is the current issue.

Marlbury Civic Library is a two-storey public library of 1972 with a 2009 entrance extension. The ground floor is accessible to most visitors by a ramped entrance and the public areas are generally well laid out. The principal barriers are the first floor, which is reached only by stairs (the platform lift is out of service), the accessible WC, which is used for storage and has no assistance alarm, and the entrance door, whose opening force is above the recommended 30 N. Six priority A actions are listed in the action plan; most can be completed by management within the current financial year.

This access audit of Marlbury Civic Library, 3 Market Walk, Marlbury (public building) was carried out on 06 May 2026. Its scope is the whole building. The audit follows the journey a disabled visitor or employee makes: arriving and parking, approaching the building, getting in, being received, moving around each floor, moving between floors, using the sanitary facilities, finding the way, seeing and hearing, and getting out in an emergency. It closes with the management arrangements that support physical access.

Features have been compared with the design guidance stated below (BS 8300-2:2018 and Approved Document M (Volume 2)). An existing building is not required to meet current guidance retrospectively; the comparison identifies where the building falls short of good practice so that the duty holder can decide what adjustments are reasonable.

Each feature in the audit tables carries a compliance status and, where action is needed, a priority, a recommendation and an indicative cost band. Compliance is recorded as one of: Compliant (meets the guidance), Partially compliant (meets it in part or with a workable management arrangement), Non-compliant (falls short and creates a barrier) or Not applicable (the feature is not present or not relevant). The priorities are:

Indicative cost bands: Nil (management or procedure only), Low (minor works or equipment, typically under about £1,000), Medium (building works by a contractor, typically £1,000 to £10,000) and High (significant alteration, typically over £10,000). They are order-of-magnitude guides for budgeting, not estimates, and exclude fees and VAT.

This report records a non-destructive visual inspection carried out from the positions, and under the conditions, described in the methodology section. No parts of the building or asset were opened up, lifted, moved or tested unless the report says so. Concealed, covered, inaccessible or obstructed areas have not been inspected and we cannot confirm that they are free from defects. Observations describe the condition on the day of inspection only.

Management arrangements are good: staff receive annual disability awareness training and a hearing loop is fitted at the desk, although it had not been tested this year. Quick wins at no cost are to clear the accessible WC of storage, switch on the loop and publish the access statement on the council website.

The action plan below brings together every item that needs action, in priority order. The Ref column carries the audit item reference; Element names the feature; Condition / description restates the barrier; Rating is the A/B/C priority; Recommended action is the recommendation; Timescale suggests when; and Cost flags items that will need a budget. Use the Location column for the floor or room.

Immediate management actions: clear the accessible WC, test the loop and the alarm, and arrange repair of the platform lift. Next budget round: adjust the entrance door closer or fit a power-assisted opener, fit contrasting nosings to the main stair and install an assistance alarm. Future refurbishment: lower a section of the reception desk, replace the entrance matting and improve the external lighting on the approach.

This audit records the condition and accessibility of the building as found on the audit date and the auditor's opinion of the priorities. It identifies barriers and suggests improvements; whether and when to carry them out is a decision for the duty holder, who should consult the people who use the building.