BUILDING AUDIT OF
VICTORIAN PUBLIC LIBRARIES
An independent report for the
State Library of Victoria and Victorian public library network
By
BBC Consulting Planners
May 2008
55 MOUNTAIN STREET BROADWAY NSW ~ PO BOX 438 BROADWAY NSW 2007
TELEPHONE [02] 9211 4099 ~ FAX [02] 9211 2740
EMAIL bbc@bbcplanners.com.au ~ WEBSITE www.bbcplanners.com.au
ABN 061 868 942
-1-
Table of contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................... 12
Project aim ............................................................................................... 12
The contribution of public libraries ........................................................... 12
The challenges facing public library buildings ........................................... 13
Are Victorian libraries equipped to face these challenges? ......................... 13
Fit for purpose: Physical condition of public library buildings in Victoria 13
Fit for purpose: Social role of library buildings in their communities ...... 16
Fit for purpose: Is the floorspace of public library buildings adequate? ... 16
Where are libraries located?...................................................................... 18
How are library assets managed?.............................................................. 18
Are there ‘enough’ public libraries in Victoria? .......................................... 19
Recommended strategies .......................................................................... 20
1.
2.
3.
4.
Building Area Factor.......................................................................... 20
Capacity building .............................................................................. 21
Community hubs and learning centres .............................................. 21
Annual and bi-annual building audits ............................................... 21
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 22
1.1 Background........................................................................................ 22
1.2 Aims and research objectives .............................................................. 22
1.3 Study context and policy framework ................................................... 25
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.3.3
1.3.4
1.3.5
The changing role and nature of the public library building........... 25
Framework for Collaborative Action .............................................. 27
Libraries Building Communities.................................................... 27
People places ................................................................................ 28
Snapshot of the Victorian public library network........................... 30
1.4 Previous audits of public library buildings........................................... 30
1.4.1 Audit of Public Library Buildings in New South Wales ................... 30
1.4.2 Previous audits in Victoria ............................................................ 33
1.5 Structure of the report ........................................................................ 34
2. STUDY APPROACH ......................................................................... 36
2.1 Methodology ....................................................................................... 36
2.2 Response rate ..................................................................................... 37
2.3 Study limitations ................................................................................ 38
-2-
3. THE ROLE OF PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS IN VICTORIA .............. 39
3.1 Administration arrangements ............................................................. 39
3.2 The value of public library buildings ................................................... 39
3.2.1 Value of buildings......................................................................... 40
3.2.2 Capital expenditure ...................................................................... 42
3.2.3 Library expenditure as a proportion of total Local Government
Authority budget ................................................................................... 45
3.2.4 Summary of future planned expenditure ....................................... 46
3.3 Utilisation of public library buildings .................................................. 47
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
Size of buildings ........................................................................... 47
Number of visitors ........................................................................ 53
Total operating hours ................................................................... 54
Overview of functional areas ......................................................... 55
Specialist uses of space ................................................................ 59
3.4 The social role of library buildings in their communities ...................... 62
3.4.1 Collocation ................................................................................... 66
3.4.2 Joint-use ...................................................................................... 68
4. PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT OF BUILDINGS......................................... 71
4.1 Context .............................................................................................. 71
4.2 Respondent views on quality ............................................................... 72
4.2.1 Survey respondents’ perception of library quality .......................... 72
4.2.2 Finest and worst features ............................................................. 77
4.3 Physical condition of public library buildings in Victoria...................... 79
4.3.1 Age of library buildings ................................................................. 79
4.3.2 Design for purpose ....................................................................... 79
4.3.3 Refurbishment.............................................................................. 81
4.4 Flexible and multifunctional buildings ................................................ 84
4.5 Internal accessibility and mobility ....................................................... 85
4.5.1
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.5.4
4.5.5
4.5.6
Wheelchair-accessible car parking ................................................ 86
Wheelchair-accessible main entrances .......................................... 87
Wheelchair-accessible levels ......................................................... 87
Wheelchair-accessible aisles ......................................................... 87
Wheelchair-accessible toilets......................................................... 87
Building characteristics connected to compliance.......................... 88
4.6 Lighting .............................................................................................. 89
4.7 Signage .............................................................................................. 90
4.7.1 External signage ........................................................................... 91
4.7.2 Internal signage ............................................................................ 91
4.8 Patron comfort.................................................................................... 93
4.9 Compliance with codes and regulations............................................... 93
4.9.1
4.9.2
4.9.3
4.9.4
Building Code of Australia ............................................................ 95
Fire rating .................................................................................... 96
Disability access ........................................................................... 98
Occupational health and safety..................................................... 98
4.10 Community safety........................................................................... 100
-3-
4.11 Tenure............................................................................................ 102
4.12 Future proofing............................................................................... 105
4.12.1 Technology ............................................................................... 105
4.12.2 Environmental sustainability .................................................... 105
5. LOCATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS................................................. 108
5.1 Proximity to other community facilities ............................................. 108
5.2 Way finding/street presence ............................................................. 109
5.3 External accessibility ........................................................................ 109
5.3.1 Car parking ................................................................................ 110
5.3.2 Public transport.......................................................................... 111
6. ASSET MANAGEMENT .................................................................. 114
6.1 Planning ........................................................................................... 114
6.2 Assessment ...................................................................................... 118
6.3 Maintenance..................................................................................... 118
6.4 Utilities spend .................................................................................. 121
7. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.................................................... 125
7.1 Perceived need for redevelopment...................................................... 125
7.2 Overview of planned library development .......................................... 125
7.3 Timeframe ........................................................................................ 134
7.4 Budget ............................................................................................. 134
7.5 Planned scope of alterations.............................................................. 136
7.5.1 Floorspace .................................................................................. 136
7.5.2 Internal reconfiguration .............................................................. 138
7.6 Delivery ............................................................................................ 140
7.7 Locational characteristics ................................................................. 141
8. LIBRARY SERVICE AUDITS........................................................... 143
8.1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 143
8.2 Observations .................................................................................... 144
9. BENCHMARKING LIBRARY SERVICE PROVISION ......................... 146
9.1 Overview........................................................................................... 146
9.2 People places benchmarks ................................................................ 146
9.3 Testing People places functional area size guide ................................ 146
9.4 Testing People places space standards .............................................. 149
10. CONCLUSION.............................................................................. 152
10.1 A planning benchmark for Victoria.................................................. 152
10.2 Recommended strategies................................................................. 152
REFERENCES ................................................................................... 154
-4-
APPENDICES .................................................................................... 157
Appendix 1: Survey tool
Appendix 2: List of survey respondents
Appendix 3: Tabulated data – LGA survey
Appendix 4: Tabulated data – Branch survey
List of tables
Table 3.1: Total insurance value of building (Q.37) .................................... 40
Table 3.2: Value of buildings in an LGA by LGA population (Q.37)............. 41
Table 3.3: Year of valuation (Q.37) ............................................................ 41
Table 3.4: Capital expenditure on branch libraries (Q.40) .......................... 42
Table 3.5: Overall LGA capital expenditure: 2006/07 to 2009/10 (Q.8)...... 45
Table 3.6: Future planned expenditure over next five years (Q.44d) ........... 46
Table 3.7: Gross Floor Area of branch libraries (Q.11) ............................... 48
Table 3.8: LGAs with central operations floorspace (Q.6a) ......................... 48
Table 3.9: Size of LGA central operations floorspace (Q.6b)........................ 49
Table 3.10: Number of levels utilised by library branches (Q.13a) .............. 49
Table 3.11: Publicly accessible levels of library branches (Q.13b)............... 50
Table 3.12: Lift access from street (Q.13d)................................................. 50
Table 3.13: Lift access – within building (Q.13b)*(Q.13d) ........................... 50
Table 3.14: Visitors per week (Q.10) .......................................................... 53
Table 3.15: Number of visitors by library size (Q.10)*(Q.11) ....................... 54
Table 3.16: Operating hours per week (Q.9) .............................................. 54
Table 3.17: Number of visitors by hours of operation (Q.9)*(Q.10).............. 55
Table 3.18: Functional area – Collections (Q.12a) ...................................... 56
Table 3.19: Functional area – Reading and study (Q.12b) .......................... 56
Table 3.20: Functional area – Resource (Q.12c) ......................................... 57
Table 3.21: Functional area – Staff (Q.12d) ............................................... 58
Table 3.22: Functional area – Amenities (Q.12e) ........................................ 58
Table 3.23: Functional area – Other (Q.12f)............................................... 59
Table 3.24: Provision of specialist floorspace (Q.14)................................... 60
Table 3.25: Collocated or joint-use libraries (Q.16a) .................................. 63
Table 3.26: Forms of collocation (Q.16b) ................................................... 66
Table 3.27: Collocated area dedicated to library functions (Q.16c) ............. 67
Table 4.1: Survey respondents’ perceptions of quality (Q.33a–c) ................ 73
Table 4.2: Period of library building construction (Q.19) ............................ 79
Table 4.3: Previous uses of library buildings (Q.21c).................................. 80
Table 4.4: Requirement for major refurbishment/extension in next five
years (Q.43a) ............................................................................................ 82
-5-
Table 4.5: Most recent major refurbishment by age (year built) of library
(Q.19) ....................................................................................................... 82
Table 4.6: Cost of most recent major refurbishment (Q.22a) ...................... 83
Table 4.7: Year access audit undertaken (Q.25b)....................................... 85
Table 4.8: Accessible parking nearby (Q.25e)............................................. 86
Table 4.9: Survey respondents’ rating of level of lighting in library
buildings (Q.26) ........................................................................................ 89
Table 4.10: Survey respondents’ rating of public information signage
(Q.27a–b).................................................................................................. 90
Table 4.11: Compliance with relevant building codes and regulations
(Q.25) ....................................................................................................... 94
Table 4.12: Year Building Code of Australia compliance audit undertaken
(Q.23) ....................................................................................................... 95
Table 4.13: Year Occupational Health and Safety audit undertaken
(Q.32b) ..................................................................................................... 99
Table 4.14: Types of security measures within library branch buildings
(Q.30) ..................................................................................................... 100
Table 4.15: Survey respondents’ rating of safety and security measures
(Q.31) ..................................................................................................... 101
Table 4.16: Owner of library buildings (Q.18a) ........................................ 102
Table 4.17: Lessor of library building (Q.18b) .......................................... 103
Table 4.18: Cost of lease (Q.18c) ............................................................. 103
Table 4.19: Owner of centralised buildings (Q.6Ca) ................................. 104
Table 4.20: Lessor of centralised buildings (Q.6Ca) ................................. 104
Table 4.21: Energy audit undertaken (Q.28b) .......................................... 105
Table 4.22: Energy-saving measures (Q.28a) ........................................... 106
Table 5.1: Proximity to community facilities (Q.34) .................................. 109
Table 5.2: Car parking (Q.35a/c/e) ......................................................... 110
Table 5.3: Wheelchair-accessible parking (Q.25e) .................................... 111
Table 5.4: Proximity to transport (Q.34) .................................................. 111
Table 6.1: Duration of asset management plan (Q.36b) ........................... 114
Table 6.2: Scope of asset management plan (Q.36b) ................................ 115
Table 6.3: Timeframe of asset management plan actions (Q.36b) ............. 115
Table 6.4: Building condition surveys (Q.42) ........................................... 118
Table 6.5: Annual maintenance costs (Q.38) ........................................... 119
Table 6.6: Breakdown of maintenance expenses (Q.38)............................ 120
Table 6.7: Estimated backlog of planned maintenance (Q.39) .................. 121
Table 6.8: Summary of utilities expenditure (Q.29) .................................. 121
Table 6.9: Quarterly expenditure on electricity (Q.29) .............................. 122
Table 6.10: Quarterly expenditure on gas and water (Q.29) ..................... 122
-6-
Table 7.1: Planned library development in Victoria (Q.7).......................... 126
Table 7.2: Location of planned library development (Q.7)......................... 127
Table 7.3: Timeframe of library development (Q.7) ................................... 134
Table 7.4: Capital budget (Q.7)................................................................ 135
Table 7.5: Internal fit-out budget (Q.7) .................................................... 136
Table 7.6: Proposed additional floorspace (Q.7) ....................................... 137
Table 7.7: Change in Gross Floor Area after redevelopment (Q.7)............. 138
Table 7.8: Type of alterations planned (Q.7) ............................................ 139
Table 7.9: Collocated or joint-use facilities planned (Q.7)......................... 140
Table 7.10: Locational characteristics of new buildings planned .............. 142
Table 9.1: Comparison of core functional areas ....................................... 147
Table 9.2: Victorian Target Collection Factor (TCF) .................................. 148
Table 9.3: Relationship between floorspace provision and benchmarks –
library services ....................................................................................... 149
Table 9.4: Testing the People places Building Area Factor........................ 151
List of figures
Figure 4.1: Survey respondents’ perceptions of quality (Q.33a–c) ............... 73
Figure 4.2: Survey respondents’ perceived finest attributes of library
buildings (Q.33d) ...................................................................................... 77
Figure 4.3: Survey respondents’ perceived worst attributes of library
buildings (Q.33e) ...................................................................................... 78
Figure 4.4: Type of work undertaken at last major refurbishment (Q.22b).. 84
Figure 4.5: Survey respondents’ satisfaction with lighting and signage
(Q.26, Q.27a–b) ........................................................................................ 90
Figure 4.6: Compliance with relevant building codes and regulations
(Q.25) ....................................................................................................... 94
Figure 4.7: Compliance with relevant codes and regulations by building age
(Q.25)*(Q.19) ............................................................................................ 95
-7-
List of case studies
Case study 1: Caroline Springs Library, Melton Library and Information
Service ..................................................................................................... 23
Case study 2: Kerang Library, Gannawarra Library Service ....................... 31
Case study 3: Sydenham Library, Brimbank Libraries............................... 43
Case study 4: Drouin Library, West Gippsland Regional Library
Corporation .............................................................................................. 51
Case study 5: West Footscray Library, Maribyrnong Library Service .......... 64
Case study 6: Wheelers Hill Library, Monash Public Library Service .......... 69
Case study 7: Wangaratta Library, High Country Library Corporation ....... 75
Case study 8: Goroke Library, Wimmera Regional Library Corporation ...... 92
Case study 9: Nathalia Library, Goulburn Valley Regional Library
Corporation ............................................................................................ 107
Case study 10: The Age (Broadmeadows) Library, Hume Global Village
Library Service ....................................................................................... 112
Case study 11: East Melbourne Library, Melbourne Library Service......... 116
Case study 12: Carnegie Library, Glen Eira Library Service ..................... 123
-8-
Abbreviations/definitions
ABS
Australian Bureau of Statistics
Amenities areas
foyer; lobby; corridors/circulation space; public, staff and
accessible toilets; restrooms; plant equipment; storage
(for maintenance equipment); and maintenance areas
BCA
Building Code of Australia
Collection areas
books on shelves; periodicals; non-print materials; toy
library; virtual and digital resources
Collocation
multiple services sharing a building, with separate areas
for each service
These areas need not be physically separated by walls.
Collocated libraries typically bring together other
Council-related services such as Council
Chambers/offices, community centres, arts centres,
youth facilities, and/or one-stop-shop services. More
recently, collocated libraries have been developed with
other government services such as community health
centres, home and community care centres, employment
services or community technology centres.
ERP
Estimated Resident Population
Functional
floorspace
six broad types of core functional areas are identified by
People places – collection areas, reading and study areas,
resource areas, staff areas, amenities and storage areas,
and additional service areas
GFA
Gross Floor Area
The sum of the floor area of each storey of a building,
measured from the internal face of external walls, or from
the internal face of walls separating the building from
any other building, and includes (a) the area of a
mezzanine within the storey
but EXCLUDES: (b) any area for common vertical
circulation, such as lifts and stairs, and (c) vehicular
access, loading areas, garbage and services, and (d) plant
rooms, lift towers and other areas used exclusively for
mechanical services or ducting, and (e) car parking
(including access to that car parking), and (f) any space
used for the loading or unloading of goods (including
access to it), and (g) terraces and balconies, and (h) void
spaces.
It includes both public and staff spaces and, for this
survey, excludes Library Service Level administration
space (both on and off-site).
-9-
Joint-use
two or more distinct library service providers serve their
client group in the same building, the governance of
which is cooperatively arranged between the separate
authorities
For example, a joint-use library may be developed
between a Library Service and a School to operate a
library serving both high school students and the broader
community. The service is shared with pooled funding
provided by both agencies to cover the capital and
recurrent costs of the service.
LGA
Local Government Authority
RAF
Relative Area Factor
The People places guidance identifying the relative
allocation of floorspace between the core functional areas
Reading areas
meeting areas; study areas; browsing, display and
information areas/exhibition space; young adult area;
multi-purpose rooms (training, AV); children’s storytelling
area; specialist genre collection area; specialist rooms
(e.g. local and family history)
Resource areas
returns and enquiries desk; service desk; internet
terminals; catalogues; printers; photocopiers; vending
machines; telephones
SLV
State Library of Victoria
Staff areas
back of house (e.g. back workrooms, lunch rooms,
offices), including staff work areas, office space and
storage (for archival materials)
TCF
Target Collection Factor
The People places guidance identifying space required to
house a library’s materials collection
- 10 -
Acknowledgements
The project was undertaken for the State Library of Victoria, in partnership
with the Victorian public library network, and under the auspices of the
Library Board of Victoria.
The project was undertaken by James Lette with the assistance of Kathryn
Henry. The project was reviewed by Sharyn Briggs of Briggs and Mortar. The
team thanks Sharyn wholeheartedly for her valuable contribution.
The authors would like to extend their thanks to the following:
ƒ
State Library of Victoria
ƒ
Viclink – Victorian Public Library and Information Network
ƒ
Municipal Association of Victoria
ƒ
Local Government Victoria, Department of Planning and Community
Development
ƒ
Libraries which participated in the pilot supported by their Councils:
− Eastern Regional Libraries: Ferntree Gully Library and Knox City
Council
− Hobsons Bay Libraries: Altona Meadows Library and Hobson Bay City
Council
− Goldfields Library Corporation: Kangaroo Flat Library and Greater
Bendigo City Council
− Gannawarra Library Service: Kerang Library and Gannawarra Shire
Council
− West Gippsland Regional Library Corporation: Warragul Library and
Baw Baw Shire Council
ƒ
Local government staff from Banyule City Council: Arun Chopra and Paul
Bruhn who reviewed the survey questions
And an especial thanks to all of the public library staff who contributed their
valuable time and effort into completing the extensive surveys. A complete
list of all libraries which participated in the survey is included in Appendix 2.
- 11 -
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project aim
This report documents the findings of the 2007 Building Audit of Victorian
public libraries undertaken for the Advisory Committee on Public Libraries, a
committee of the Library Board of Victoria; the Victorian public library
network; and the State Library of Victoria. It is one of a suite of statewide
projects conducted under the auspices of the Library Board of Victoria to
assist in the development of the Victorian public library network. The Audit
of Victorian public library buildings was undertaken to identify the current
state of Victorian public library buildings and provide a tool for library
service managers to assess their suitability to meet community needs.
The project utilises People places: A guide for public library buildings in New
South Wales (Library Council of New South Wales 2005), a best practice,
comprehensive guide to designing and building suitable structures for
libraries to enable maximum usage by residents and the general public. This
report covers the five key areas of floorspace and functions; building design;
locational factors; building management and maintenance; and information
on planning and development procedures.
The Audit was undertaken via an online survey. A response rate of 94.9% of
Local Government Authorities (LGAs) and 96.5% of branch libraries was
achieved. In total, 75 LGAs and 244 branch libraries responded.
The contribution of public libraries
Libraries make a fundamental contribution to our communities. The Audit
information identifies1 that:
ƒ
The total value of library buildings in Victoria is $522 million –
approximately $104 per person. The median value of library buildings is
$1.5 million, with values spanning a wide range – two-thirds are worth
over $1 million and 10% are valued at less than $250,000.
ƒ
The 45 Victorian library services receive funding of $144,932,834 per
annum, or $29 per capita (NSLA 2007:11). We understand that this
makes Victoria the lowest funded State in Australia.
ƒ
There was a total capital expenditure of $14,437,881 on 89 branch
libraries in 2006/07. The median value per branch was $10,500, and the
average was $162,223. If it was assumed that the balance of branches
made similar levels of capital expenditure, up to $40 million per annum
could be spent on library buildings in Victoria. Limited confidence is held
with the accuracy of this estimate given the variations in the data
underlying such an assumption, and fluctuations year on year.
ƒ
In the year ending 30 June 2004, there were approximately 24,407,000
visits to public libraries in Victoria, with 2,538,812 registered borrowers
(51.5% of the 4,932,422 persons usually resident in Victoria)
(ABS 2005:14).
ƒ
Victorian libraries lend 48,743,783 items per annum (or approximately
19 per member), and deal with 2,580,862 enquiries (NSLA 2007:8).
1 with some limitations as noted in the body of the report
- 12 -
ƒ
On average, every day every Victorian public library will lend about 500
items, receive nearly 270 visits and respond to nearly 30 reference
enquiries (Library Board of Victoria, Executive Summary, 2005:5).
The challenges facing public library buildings
However, libraries are facing new challenges, as the demographic character
of the community changes and social trends alter, including:
ƒ
‘population and demographic mix changing more rapidly than ever
before;
ƒ
Information and Communications Technology (ICT) reconfiguring the
nature of physical space, communications and movement;
ƒ
education moving out of the institutions to affect the whole of society;
and
ƒ
leisure, recreation and personal development increasingly fuse in a more
individualistic culture’ (CABE & Resource 2003:4).
User needs have changed dramatically over the past decade, whereby local
and larger public libraries are no longer a facility to solely borrow books or
study.
In response, libraries need to change physically, as well as changing the
manner in which they operate.
The changing needs of the community have meant many library buildings no
longer meet contemporary needs or current standards. A modern ‘public
library needs accessible, generous and attractive buildings containing
different but connected spaces’ (Bundy 2006:1).
Are Victorian libraries equipped to face these challenges?
The relevance of libraries to today’s community is unquestionable, evident in
their high levels of usage and attraction to a broad range of users from all
ages and backgrounds.
A key question to be answered by the Audit was whether existing library
buildings are ‘fit for purpose’ and able to meet these challenges.
Fit for purpose: Physical condition of public library buildings in Victoria
Many commentators have identified a ‘renaissance’ in which public libraries
have reinvented themselves in the past decade, revising their role as beacons
for civic pride, social and economic regeneration (Worpole 2005:5). At the
same time, this has resulted in a resurgence of building activity in the
recognition that ‘old, tired, outdated buildings are the worst advertisement
for our profession; well maintained, vibrant, relevant buildings the best’
(Mackenzie cited in Bundy 2004:16). Consistent with international trends, in
2006 Bundy identified that local government across Australia was
endeavouring to replace and rebuild libraries, with about 200 new library
buildings and rebuilds having been constructed between 2000 and 2006 –
many of them excellent and of world standard (Bundy 2006:2).
Victoria reflects this global trend, with a number of buildings built recently,
and a number more planned for construction over the next five years.
- 13 -
The Audit identified that:
ƒ
19 new branch libraries are planned;
ƒ
25 existing libraries are to be completely replaced (either at the same site
or a new site); and
ƒ
27 branch libraries are to be refurbished.
However, the scope of the task is large. The majority of Victorian building
stock is old, with just 12.7% constructed after the year 2000. The largest
proportion was built in the period 1960–1979 (33.3%).
The Audit confirms that the local government landscape in which public
libraries operate is constrained by infrastructure backlogs, and competition
between public libraries and a plethora of other local services which require
funding. The ongoing development of public libraries in Victoria is
constrained by available funding.
The Audit further identifies that:
ƒ
More than one-third of Victorian library branches have not been
refurbished since being built; 58.6% of all branches have undergone
major refurbishment. Approximately two-thirds (63.9%) of these
refurbishments took place in the past seven years.
ƒ
The majority of public libraries in Victoria were purpose built (60.5%).
However, this does not appear to be the trend with new buildings, as
many of the more recently established libraries in Victoria have not been
purpose built. Approximately one-quarter (25.1%) of all non-purpose
built libraries were established in the past seven years. It is probable that
this is due to the limited availability of capital funding for new buildings.
Many newer library buildings have been converted from Council
Chambers/Council offices or from existing commercial and retail spaces.
ƒ
This has an affect on floorspace, as library buildings which are purpose
built tend to have a larger gross floor area (GFA) than those that were not
originally built to contain a library.
ƒ
Disabled accessibility in all respects is generally the exception rather
than the rule. Disabled accessibility (particularly wheelchair accessible
toilets and adequate aisle widths between shelving) is less compliant in
older libraries. In an LGA there is often not one library branch that is
wheelchair accessible in all respects. This has important ramifications for
both patrons and the employment of people with a physical disability in
Victorian libraries.
ƒ
There are quite a large number of libraries where compliance with fire
rating, disability and OH&S is not known or not achieved. The purpose of
the Building Code of Australia (BCA) audit does not always appear to be
understood.
ƒ
Older libraries, particularly those built pre-1940, are least likely to
comply with codes and regulations; the newest libraries are most likely to
comply with codes and regulations. Compliance with codes and
regulations is generally higher among those LGAs with relatively high
maintenance expenditure.
- 14 -
ƒ
It is apparent that some libraries are ‘working harder’ than others. The
number of people visiting libraries in Victoria ranged from 0.67 to 196.7
people per hour. The median was 1,636 visitors per week. The number of
visitors per week on average correlates strongly with the GFA of public
libraries.
The Audit informed the above quantitative data with a range of qualitative
questions assessing the opinions of branch librarians about the physical
building: its internal layout and design; the overall standard of their library
branches; and the finest and worst attributes of their building. These views
may or may not reflect the views of other stakeholders, such as the library
service manager who has responsibility for management of the building and
strategic decisions about its future. However, they add to the overall
understanding of the state of Victoria’s public library buildings. This is borne
out by the Audit’s finding that a respondent’s perception of the quality of the
library building is a key factor in their perception of the overall standard of
their library branch.
The results of these qualitative questions were largely positive:
ƒ
Almost one-third (31.8%) of respondents perceived the overall standard of
their branch as being excellent, and more than half (57.9%) gave an
overall rating of satisfactory.
ƒ
One-quarter (25.4%) of respondents perceived the quality of their
physical building to be excellent and more than half (54.9%) rated their
building as satisfactory.
ƒ
One-quarter (24.2%) perceived their library’s internal layout and design
to be excellent, and approximately half (55.3%) rated as satisfactory.
ƒ
In order of importance, the following are important features of a library
building: location, natural light, internal layout, adequate size/space,
and accessibility. In order of importance, the following design features
affect negative views of a library building: inadequate size/space, poor
internal layout, aged/poor building condition, and the quality of its
facilities.
ƒ
Almost nine out of ten branches (88.1%) described the level of lighting
within the library as either satisfactory or excellent. A number noted that
lighting improvements were a key consideration of their recent
refurbishments.
ƒ
Almost two-thirds (65.4%) of respondents rated their library’s external
signage as either Satisfactory or Excellent. More than three-quarters of
respondents (77.4%) described the internal signage within their library
branch as either satisfactory or excellent, a higher proportion than
ratings for external signage. The vast majority of libraries that gave a
rating of poor and provided additional comments indicated that new or
improved internal signage was either planned, or was currently being
undertaken.
The link between a library’s community value and its physical design and
layout is well established in the literature. If it’s not appropriately designed
for need, it won’t be as utilised.
- 15 -
Fit for purpose: Social role of library buildings in their communities
A concept gaining increasing favour is a library being developed as a key
element in community hubs and learning centres. The Libraries Building
Communities project (Library Board of Victoria, Report 2, 2005:46) envisages
that communities could build hubs that house a range of services such as
library services, children’s services, medical centres, maternal support
groups, drop-in centres, and other learning and community activities.
There are significant advantages emerging in collocation: ‘a single large
building can be easier to construct, to keep secure and to maintain than
several smaller buildings. Sharing car parks, foyers and other common
spaces can make economic sense. Collocated facilities may be more
convenient for the community.’ Some local authorities are able to include
revenue generating components in a development, such as a cafe, bookshop
or gymnasium. ‘More and more libraries are being constructed in shopping
centres, often as a result of the deal between the local authority and the
developer’ (Jones 2004).
The Victorian experience revealed by the Audit does not generally reflect this
trend. Joint-use libraries are as uncommon in Victoria as they are in
Australia generally (just 9.8% of branches). Collocated libraries are much
more common, comprising a significant proportion of libraries (52.3%).
In reality, however, of those libraries that are collocated, about half are
collocated with other local government uses and could not be described as
hubs. Only 17.3% were collocated with a community centre, and just 4.7%
with a community health centre. Only two were collocated with some form of
learning centre/adult education service. While 93.9% provided a children’s
storytelling area or young adult area, none were associated with a broader
youth service. Collocated libraries do appear more likely to have access to
community meeting space.
This is not to say that libraries are not making the most of their existing
assets in this regard, providing a range of specialist services within their
remit as described in Section 3.3.5.
Collocation of newer libraries is very common, and this trend is appearing
with new library buildings. It is a trend which will only be met over time with
the redevelopment of existing building stock.
Fit for purpose: Is the floorspace of public library buildings adequate?
There is nearly 145,000 sq m of library floorspace in Victoria, in 247 branch
buildings. The average size of a library is 595 sq m (median size of
400 sq m). Libraries are generally sized between 250 and 1,000 sq m (44%).
84% of branches are located on a single level of a building, predominately
the ground floor.
There is vast variation in the proportional space allocation of functional
areas, even in newer libraries. Some of the older (and particularly smaller)
libraries have virtually all of their proportional functional floorspace
dedicated to collection areas. Many older libraries have low proportions of
floorspace for staff areas compared to the Victorian average, and some have
none.
There is a tendency in newer areas to much larger libraries, generally over
1,000 sq m, and up to 3,500 sq m. Currently, only five libraries (2.1%) are
over 2,000 sq m in size.
- 16 -
Thirty-three branches (13.8%) are less than the 139 sq m GFA minimum size
recommended by People places for a public library building. All but one of
these branches is in rural or regional LGAs; this is related to the very high
numbers of smaller libraries still serving rural areas.
Despite perceptions that less space is needed in libraries, there is no
evidence that this is true. Library buildings need to provide different types of
spaces to meet the diverse needs of a variety of different users. The literature
suggests that the number of functions preformed by the modern library, and
consequently the number of spaces within it, is increasing.
This is further confirmed by the Audit, which identifies that libraries provide
floorspace regularly used for a large variety of specialist services (either
exclusively or on a shared basis). Just under half of branch libraries (45.2%)
contain specialist multi-purpose areas. Most frequently this included:
ƒ
a children’s storytelling area (93.9% of branches);
ƒ
computer labs/internet areas (78.6%);
ƒ
an area for young adults (70.8%); and
ƒ
office space (77.8%).
No other type of specialist space was provided by more than half of library
branches.
Despite community demands for a wide range of functions, few branch
libraries (15.2%) have the ability to subdivide multi-purpose areas within
their building, such as through the use of wall partitions.
People places identified six broad types of core functional areas in public
libraries. There is vast variation in the proportional space allocation of
floorspace for functional areas, even in newer libraries. Newer libraries are
better planned in terms of functional areas. The median values for each type
of functional area are identified in the following table:
Collection
areas
Reading
and study
areas
Resource
areas
Staff areas
Amenities
areas
Median sq m
170
50
35
44
50
Distribution
of GFA mean
42%
18.2%
9.9%
14.7%
15.2%
The most significant observation arising from an analysis of the distribution
of functional areas within Victorian libraries is that some spaces are overrepresented relative to the area of collection areas (or conversely, it could be
said that collection areas are under-represented relative to other types of
functional areas). This over-representation occurs in all areas other than
staff areas, which sit at the recommended 35% of the collection areas space.
Reading and study areas have 43% of the recommended space compared to
30% in People places; resource areas have 23% compared to a recommended
15%; and amenities areas have 36% compared to a recommended 20%.
Accordingly, the report further considered whether collection areas are
under-represented in Victoria, or whether the other functional areas are
relatively over-represented. It was concluded that the size of collection areas
in Victoria is substantially smaller (72.3%) than what is provided for by the
space standard for collections in People places. This can be attributed to
- 17 -
People places being developed for application to new libraries, which have
more open designs, and a vertically reduced number of shelving bays.
Where are libraries located?
People places identifies a number of key locational criteria to be considered
in determining the most appropriate site for a public library, which have
been examined in the Audit. In respect to these, the Audit reveals:
ƒ
The connection between local government and public libraries clearly
translates into locational choice. As expected, a high proportion of
libraries were located with or near other Council-provided services (such
as administration) and spaces (such as other cultural, recreational or
sporting facilities).
ƒ
Surprisingly, Audit responses do not clearly support the growing trend
identified in literature of public libraries in both Australia and overseas
locating in shopping centres. However, 13.9% of branches are located
adjacent to one, and a further 26.6% are within walking distance. About
half were located on a main street (shopping/business precinct).
ƒ
Accessibility to schools is lower than expected, with just less than half
being located within walking distance (400 metres) of a school. A small
number (5.7%) were located within or adjacent to a school. Nine libraries
indicated that they were facilities jointly used by a school.
ƒ
Libraries collocating with schools appear to be less accessible to
traditional foci such as main streets and shopping precincts.
ƒ
Almost all libraries (95%) are located within walking distance of car
parking (86.5% being adjacent). This car parking was provided free of
charge at almost all libraries (96.3%).
ƒ
Libraries in traditional main street foci often have inadequate parking,
and good accessibility to community foci and facilities could be
considered a trade-off against this. Approximately one-quarter (27.9%)
indicated that the current provision of car parking available near the
library was inadequate.
ƒ
The proportion of libraries located within close proximity to public
transport (61.1% within 400 metres), while still significant, was notably
less than those libraries accessible by car. Libraries are significantly
more likely to be located near a bus stop than a train station.
ƒ
Libraries are generally located on the ground floor with street frontage
(94.3%).
ƒ
Newer libraries are better planned in terms of accessibility of location.
How are library assets managed?
In Victoria, public libraries are largely the responsibility of local government,
which must undertake the construction and maintenance of these buildings
from their annual budgets, with the assistance of statewide public library
grant funding.
Approximately half (55.7%) of libraries have some form of asset management
plan for their building. A number of Councils operated a generic asset
management plan for all buildings, in which the library was included.
- 18 -
Building condition surveys are undertaken by library services or local
authorities for almost four-fifths (79.1%) of Victorian library branches.
In terms of planning and maintenance, the Audit identified:
ƒ
With rare exception, there is substantial ongoing effort and expenditure
being put into the maintenance and upgrading of the standard and
provision of libraries to communities.
ƒ
At least $5.7 million is spent each year on maintaining public library
buildings in Victoria. This figure is expected to be notably higher, as 34
libraries did not provide their annual maintenance expenditure.
ƒ
On average, approximately $27,232 is spent on the maintenance of each
public library branch. On average, $43.50 is spent on maintenance per
sq m of library floorspace.
ƒ
Some older libraries (even those built in the 1980s) are incurring high
maintenance costs.
ƒ
Existing and planned investment in library infrastructure, and in many
cases maintenance, is often lower than average in rural areas.
ƒ
There is vast variation in the cost of utilities to libraries. Many libraries
have not undertaken energy audits. On average, libraries spend about
$4,600 on electricity, $1,100 on gas, and $500 on water (approximately
$5,500 per quarter in total). Utilities expenditure is correlated with
floorspace, and, on average, $8 per sq m on utilities.
ƒ
Victorian libraries were planning to undertake expenditure on capital
building of nearly $46 million over the next five years and expenditure on
internal assets (excluding book stock and other resources) of
approximately $5.7 million. The anticipated average capital building
budget (where provided) for those libraries planning to undertake work
was approximately $1.53 million and the internal works $249,000;
however, these ranged from $7.5 million to $100 in the case of capital
building works and $1.75 million to $200 in the case of internal assets.
ƒ
The average cost of library refurbishment was approximately $520,000;
however, this average is skewed by a number of large refurbishments.
More than half (55.5%) of library branches whose buildings had been
refurbished indicated that the total cost of refurbishments was less than
$500,000.
Are there ‘enough’ public libraries in Victoria?
A range of planning benchmarks, such as those in People places, have been
discussed and applied in this report. While notable variation within the State
makes it difficult to generalise, in comparison to these planning benchmarks
it is clear that the current level of floorspace provision in Victoria is less than
adequate. Nearly half of library services do not meet the People places
suggested minimum standard of provision. Overall, the current provision of
floorspace in Victoria is 28 sq m per 1,000 people, which is less than the
minimum required, which has been estimated to currently be 30 sq m per
1,000 people.
The Audit has broadly confirmed the accuracy of the planning benchmarks
utilised by People places and has not revealed any information which
suggests that they should be altered. A number of discrepancies do exist,
and have been noted in the analysis.
- 19 -
We have, however, paid less attention to service-based and population-based
benchmarks outlined in People places in recommending a State benchmark,
as the testing undertaken suggests that they are more appropriate for
assessing and designing new buildings, rather than retrospectively assessing
existing buildings. For example, a number of the design standards upon
which the service-based benchmark is predicated are not appropriate when
applied to a building designed 20 years previously.
Recommended strategies
1. Building Area Factor
We recommend that planning standards based upon the Building Area
Factor in People places be relied upon. It is recommended that these be
adopted for use in Victoria, namely:
ƒ
Less than 20,000 – provide 42 sq m per 1,000 population
ƒ
Between 20,001–35,000 – provide 39 sq m per 1,000 population
ƒ
Between 35,001–65,000 – provide 35 sq m per 1,000 population
ƒ
Between 65,001–100,000 – provide 31 sq m per 1,000 population
ƒ
More than 100,000 – provide 28 sq m per 1,000 population
These rates have been analysed in the Victorian context, and it is concluded
that:
ƒ
Provision in small LGAs (i.e. those with less than 10,000 population) and
LGAs with between 65,001–100,000 population exceeds the benchmark.
ƒ
Provision in LGAs between 20,001–35,000 population matches the
benchmark.
ƒ
All other LGA sizes fall short of the benchmark.
We also recommend that a State benchmark of 30 sq m per 1,000 population
be adopted as a target.
It may also prove appropriate to develop a rural and a metropolitan
benchmark, and it is further suggested that consideration be given to this at
a later date.
These standards should form the starting point for determining what need
might be present in a community. They must be informed by other factors
about local need.
Strategies for improving provision in Victoria should initially aim for parity
with the current State average of 28 sq m per 1,000 population in those
LGAs which fall short of this target. We regard this as an equitable
approach. This will involve the provision of an additional 19,039 sq m of
gross floorspace.
In the longer term, strategies should seek to achieve a target of 30 sq m per
1,000 population, and meeting the People places BAF as relevant to an LGA’s
population size. This will involve the provision of an additional 24,184 sq m
of gross floorspace (or 5,145 sq m more than the initial target). These figures
do not include an allowance for projected population growth.
- 20 -
2. Capacity building
The Audit results also point to a need for a range of capacity building
activities to be undertaken. Topics identified by the Audit include education
on:
ƒ
Internal library planning, e.g. internal layout and design, and functional
space allocation. We suggest that this involve activities which propagate
the concepts established within People places.
ƒ
The purpose of the Building Code of Australia and other applicable
building codes and regulations. Priority attention should be given to
improving disability access compliance, especially given the critical role of
libraries in community building and fostering social inclusion. An early
target is for each LGA to have one branch which is fully accessible in all
respects. This is not currently the case in a number of LGAs.
ƒ
The value of energy audits, their process, and the savings which can be
achieved in utility costs.
Further detailed guidance could be provided to library services either
through documentation or seminars. Documentation developed need not be
a formal report, but could be in the form of a circular or an article in a
magazine.
3. Community hubs and learning centres
The move towards the concept of libraries as community hubs and learning
centres should be further promoted and facilitated. A useful starting point
would be to undertake a more detailed review of existing collocated libraries
which act as hubs, to identify their advantages and disadvantages, any
barriers to their development, implementation and management, and seek
successful ways to promote their implementation. This would examine not
just how hubs can be achieved in new libraries, but more importantly given
the sector funding constraints, how existing infrastructure can be adapted to
the task. Initial guidance may be found in some of the case studies
contained in this report.
4. Annual and bi-annual building audits
It is further recommended that, at a State level, this Audit be undertaken
every two years in order to monitor progress and change in Victoria’s library
building stock. Internal updates of the individual LGA audit reports should
be prepared by each library service annually.
- 21 -
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
This report documents the findings of the 2007 Building Audit of Victorian
public libraries undertaken for the Advisory Committee on Public Libraries, a
committee of the Library Board of Victoria; the Victorian public library
network; and the State Library of Victoria. It is one of a suite of statewide
projects conducted under the auspices of the Library Board of Victoria to
assist in the development of the Victorian public library network.
The project utilises People places: A guide for public library buildings in New
South Wales (Library Council of New South Wales 2005), a best practice,
comprehensive guide to designing and building suitable structures for
libraries to enable maximum usage by residents and the general public. This
report covers the five key areas of floorspace and functions; building design;
locational factors; building management and maintenance; and information
on planning and development procedures.
1.2 Aims and research objectives
The aim of the project was to conduct a comprehensive Audit of Victorian
public library buildings to identify the current state of Victorian public
library buildings and provide a tool for library service managers to assess
their suitability to meet community needs.
The outcomes of the Audit are:
ƒ
A statewide report to provide:
− an overview and trend analysis of Victorian public library service
buildings with conclusions about the current state of Victorian public
library service buildings;
− a current ‘snapshot’ of library floorspace functions and building
structure by library service branch against the informally accepted
industry standards outlined in the key document People places: A
guide for public library buildings in New South Wales;
− current planning and development, and the estimated value of
Victorian public library buildings; and
− case studies of Victorian public library buildings, as selected by a
representative selection panel.
ƒ
Individual Local Government Authority (LGA) audit reports to provide
library service and branch level data as well as benchmarking against the
informally accepted industry standards outlined in People places. These
audit reports enable public libraries in Victoria to compare their library
buildings with published standards.
It is intended that this report will provide a basis for improvements to
Victorian public library buildings in terms of floorspace, capacity, safety
regulations, and services provisions of the future.
- 22 -
Case study 1: Caroline Springs Library, Melton Library and Information Service
(Photographer: Emma Cross)
Gross floor area:
2,500 sq m
User catchment:
Melton East Corridor
At present approaching 40,000 people with growth
expected to 60,000 within the next 10 years
Cost:
Approx $12 million including fit-out and establishment
collection of 35,000 items
Architect:
Suters Prior Cheney Architects
26 Liddiard Street
Hawthorn VIC 3122
Principal design architect: Mark van den Enden
Date completed:
January 2008
Usage:
500–600 visitors per day
Caroline Springs Library is an outstanding example of the modern trend for
public libraries to be community hubs, collocated with other community
services and offering users excellent facilities and resources in a pleasant
and relaxing environment.
The library is an iconic structure inspired by local geographic features and
presenting a unique frontage to the street, set in an integrated landscape
and incorporating excellent access from two entry points. The building uses
natural light extensively and its interior form and fittings reinforce and
complement the external design features to create a space that is light-filled,
bright, airy; comfortable and visually interesting.
- 23 -
Caroline Springs Library continued
The building also serves as the school library for the adjacent senior campus
of the Caroline Springs Secondary College; houses the Caroline Springs
College Director; Council’s customer service centre, which is open at all
times when the library is open; seven community meeting spaces with
capacity from 5–70 people; a computer training facility for up to 50 people;
an audiovisual studio and a cafe.
(Photographer: Emma Cross)
It also incorporates the latest in ICT equipment into its spaces and
functions, including the latest in self-serve RFID technology; a teen lounge
that has three Playstation3 consoles; audiovisual suites for use by the public
to enable production of audio and video works; built-in projection and sound
capacity into the community spaces; public wireless internet connectivity;
and an integrated booking and print management system for all public PC
facilities. In addition, all shelving within the library is moveable and modular
to enable maximum flexibility for use of the library spaces.
(Photographer: Emma Cross)
- 24 -
1.3 Study context and policy framework
1.3.1 The changing role and nature of the public library building
Reports of the death of the library have been greatly exaggerated… The
technological revolution of the 1980s and 1990s was widely seen as sounding
the death knell for the public library as we knew it… These predictions have
proved unfounded… Imaginatively designed and responsive public library
services can play a pivotal role in promoting greater social cohesion and a
stronger sense of civic pride and local identity (Worpole 2005:5).
Libraries are facing new challenges; as the demographic character of the
community changes and social trends alter, so do the requirements for
public library buildings. The United Kingdom’s Council for Museums,
Archives and Libraries noted in 2003 that population and demographic mix
was changing more rapidly than ever before; information and
communications technology was reconfiguring the nature of physical space,
communications and movement; education was moving out of the
institutions to alter the whole of society; and leisure, recreation and personal
development were increasingly fusing in a more individualistic culture
(CABE & Resource 2003:4).
Regardless of these changes, there is no consideration that the physical
library building is a thing of the past. Indeed the modern public library has
been fairly described as the anchor of the community, and by Australian
social commentator Hugh McKay, as the ‘new village green’ (Bundy 2006:1).
There have been many recent attempts to identify the value of the public
library. Cox (2000) undertook a landmark study in 2000 which showed that
libraries contribute to social capital in many ways. The United Kingdom’s
Department for Culture, Media and Sport, among many others, noted in
2003 that libraries are acknowledged as safe, welcoming, neutral spaces
open to all in the community. Various studies are also finding ways to
measure the economic contribution of libraries, including McCallum and
Quinn (2001) and dmA Planning, Research and Management
Services (2007).
In 2005, the State Library of Victoria undertook the Libraries Building
Communities (LBC) project, the first comprehensive Australian study of the
value the public libraries add to their communities (Library Board of
Victoria 2005). This project noted that ‘public libraries hold an important
place in people’s hearts’ and make a fundamental contribution to our
communities (Audit Commission UK cited in Library Board of Victoria,
Report 1, 2005:5). In line with community building as one of the key
strategic directions of the Victorian Government, libraries provide space
where citizens can gather and work on personal and community problems.
They also ‘provide a wide range of innovative, creative programs that bring
citizens together and break down the barriers of age, ethnicity, culture,
socio-economic status, language and geography’ (Kranich cited in Library
Board of Victoria, Report 1, 2005:16).
In the words of People places (Library Council of New South Wales 2005:7),
‘public libraries are one of the most well used educational, cultural and
social facilities available within our community. The relevance of libraries to
today’s community is considered to be evident in their high levels of usage
and attraction to a broad range of users from all ages and backgrounds’, as
- 25 -
evidenced in Victoria by the LBC project which identified that ‘on average,
every day every Victorian public library will lend about 500 items; … receive
nearly 270 visits from a total of 2.5 million registered users (over half the
Victorian population) and respond to nearly 30 reference enquiries’ (Library
Board of Victoria, Executive Summary, 2005:5).
Consequently, it is not surprising that many commentators have identified a
‘renaissance’ in which public libraries have reinvented themselves in the
past decade, revising their role as beacons for civic pride, social and
economic regeneration (Worpole 2005:5). At the same time, this has resulted
in a resurgence of building activity in the recognition that ‘old, tired,
outdated buildings are the worst advertisement for our profession; well
maintained, vibrant, relevant buildings the best’ (Mackenzie cited in
Bundy 2004:16). Consistent with international trends, in 2006 Bundy
identified that local government across Australia was endeavouring to
replace and rebuild libraries; with about 200 new library buildings and
rebuilds having been constructed between 2000 and 2006 – many of them
excellent and of world standard (Bundy 2006:2). However, he also identified
at least 400 libraries waiting to be replaced or rebuilt.
In Victoria, public libraries are largely the responsibility of local government,
which must undertake the construction and maintenance of these buildings
from their annual budgets, with the assistance of statewide public library
grant funding. The changing needs of the community have meant many
library buildings no longer meet contemporary needs or current standards. A
modern ‘public library needs accessible, generous and attractive buildings
containing different but connected spaces’ (Bundy 2006:1).
Recurring themes throughout the literature regarding the necessities of
modern public library buildings include user needs, space and costs
(Jones 2004). The local government landscape in which public libraries
operate is constrained by infrastructure backlogs, and competition between
public libraries and a plethora of other local services which require funding.
‘With changing demographic and social trends, ever-increasing financial
constraints for government and rapidly changing information technology, the
design and function of libraries must change to meet these and new other
challenges’ (Library Council of New South Wales 2005:7).
User needs have changed dramatically over the past decade, whereby local
and larger public libraries are no longer a facility to solely borrow books or
study. Libraries are now more people focused, with extra services and
facilities for the local community. They are, in a way, becoming a hub for
community life. Jones (2004) identifies the differences between ‘user needs’
and ‘user wants’ within local libraries, and asserts it is a mistake to compare
local libraries without assessing the real needs of the people who utilise the
library. There is no longer a one-size-fits-all approach to library planning,
and this had been recognised over the past few years.
Space requirements are usually limited by the location of the current or
proposed library and perhaps the city it is in. Space for development in
metropolitan areas is no longer available at reasonable prices as it was in the
past. However, with library services changing, there are now greater
demands for space within local libraries. Scarcity of land has encouraged
local authorities to collocate more than one facility on the same site, often
with other State or municipal services or community activities (Jones 2004).
There are significant advantages emerging in collocation: ‘a single large
building can be easier to construct, to keep secure and to maintain than
- 26 -
several smaller buildings. Sharing car parks, foyers and other common
spaces can make economic sense. Collocated facilities may be more
convenient for the community.’ Some local authorities are able to include
revenue generating components in a development, such as a cafe, bookshop
or gymnasium. ‘More and more libraries are being constructed in shopping
centres, often as a result of the deal between the local authority and the
developer’ (Jones 2004).
The United Kingdom’s Department for Culture, Media and Sport (2003:6)
claims that the best libraries are showing the way forward. ‘Eye-catching
new library buildings have opened in a number of cities and other places
which are seeking to radically redefine the ways in which library services are
delivered.’ Whichever way this is, it seems clear that ‘buildings will always
play an important role, whether as adaptations or refurbishments of existing
building stock, joint ventures with other public or commercial services in
shared or collocated premises, or in dedicated new library buildings which
speak to the changing needs of the 21st century’ (Worpole 2005:6).
1.3.2 Framework for Collaborative Action
The Framework for Collaborative Action (Library Board of Victoria and
Victorian Public Library Network 2006:3) defines the way in which the
Library Board of Victoria, through the State Library of Victoria, works with
the public library network to deliver improved library services to Victoria’s
communities.
The undertaking of the Building Audit of Victorian public libraries responds
to the top three goals and priorities of the Framework for Collaborative
Action (2006:6), namely: enhanced collections; improved access options; and
seamless service to users.
1.3.3 Libraries Building Communities
A collaborative research project of the Library Board of Victoria and the
Victorian public library network, the Libraries Building Communities (LBC)
project is aimed at meeting the challenges facing libraries today. The LBC
project was the first comprehensive Australian study that examined the
value that public libraries add to their communities. Through extensive
surveys with Victorian public library services and the Victorian public, the
study found that libraries and librarians make a fundamental contribution
to communities in four key areas. They:
ƒ
provide free public access to computer and information technology
resources;
ƒ
create better informed communities by helping people locate information;
ƒ
promote life long learning and literacy in the community through the
programs they run; and
ƒ
build connections between individuals, groups and government (Library
Board of Victoria, Executive Summary, 2005:5).
There are four main reports and an Executive Summary in the initial LBC
(Library Board of Victoria 2005) series:
ƒ
Report 1: Setting the Scene covers the concept of community building, the
Victorian Government’s policy agenda, the Victorian public library
network, project methodology, and relevant research.
- 27 -
ƒ
Report 2: Logging the Benefits outlines the community views on the role
and benefits of public libraries.
ƒ
Report 3: Bridging the Gaps provides socio-economic demographic profiles
of library users and non-users, as well as strategies for bridging the
perceived gaps in public library service delivery.
ƒ
Report 4: Showcasing the Best gives over 30 examples of innovation and
excellence in Victorian public libraries.
In 2006, further research was undertaken resulting in the Libraries Building
Communities Library User Census and Survey Project, which produced two
additional reports:
ƒ
Report 1: Statewide Analysis and Comparisons.
ƒ
Report 2: Library Services Data and Reports.
Together, these reports provide a systematic evidence base at both the
statewide and library service level concerning the users, uses and benefits of
library services (Library Board of Victoria 2006:4), and are integral to the
development of benchmarks of library provision in Section 9 of this report.
1.3.4 People places
People places: A guide for public library buildings in New South Wales
(hereinafter referred to as People places), researched and prepared by
Heather Nesbitt Planning and Bligh Voller Nield, was commissioned by the
Library Council of New South Wales in 2000 to promote planning techniques
and practical guidelines for the development of library buildings. It sets out
information not only on the design of buildings but also the processes
required to develop successful library development projects.
In 2005, it was felt that an update to People places would be useful as it
would be possible to include an evaluation of libraries which had used the
original edition in the planning of their buildings. Its success as a planning
framework and benchmark has encouraged other States in Australia to
tackle the changing trends and needs of the community with respect to
public libraries (Library Council of New South Wales 2005).
People places identifies the key objectives for future public libraries as being
buildings which:
ƒ
‘Provide a cultural hub and focal point for the community
ƒ
Are functional and multipurpose accommodating a range of activities and
uses
ƒ
Enable access to the latest in technology in a user-friendly manner
ƒ
Attract a wide range of users providing areas for relaxation, research,
leisure and learning
ƒ
Are effective and efficient in the delivery of services
ƒ
Develop from a co-operative approach between all stakeholders to ensure
that the changing needs of the community are met’ (Library Council of
New South Wales 2005:7).
- 28 -
The second edition identified emerging trends impacting on the design and
function of public libraries in New South Wales (and equally relevant in
Victoria) including:
ƒ
Public libraries as places of social capital, where people from a range of
backgrounds can meet, network and potentially develop relationships
with other members of the community.
ƒ
Ageing of the community, as the number of older residents with
significant leisure time increases and also the increase in the level of
disability in our community, specific consideration of physical design
issues and specific services for older residents and people with a
disability is required.
ƒ
Development of a youth culture, with young people as major consumers
of information technology who hold social attitudes that are often
different from other groups in the community can mean different services
and spaces are required.
ƒ
The expanding role of information technology in our society.
ƒ
The increasing library needs of our multicultural society, particularly on
multilingual collections.
ƒ
Recognition and celebration of our indigenous community, with a need to
ensure public libraries located in communities with large indigenous
populations are attractive, welcoming and relevant to all members of the
community.
ƒ
Growing competition from other sources of information, education and
entertainment in a rapidly changing world.
ƒ
Increasing cultural development in our communities.
ƒ
A growing regionalisation of settlement patterns in coastal communities,
and declining populations and a changing economic base in rural areas.
ƒ
The NSW policy of compact cities and the impacts of urban consolidation
(Library Council of New South Wales 2005:7–14).
A key element of People places has been the provision of a planning process
for the development of public libraries, and, in particular, a process of
identifying needs which can be translated into the design and functional
floor areas required in a new/expanded library facility. People places
provides a suite of four different tools for assessing need, including:
ƒ
Identified need, expressed by stakeholders such as library staff,
community groups and Council officers.
ƒ
Normative need, based on socio-demographic information and
recognised statistical indicators about library usage, provision per capita,
etc.
ƒ
Comparative need, based on comparing service provision with other
communities with similar socio-demographic characteristics.
ƒ
Benchmark-based need, using specific tools related to the services
provided by public libraries and the population served by a library, this
tool provides two different approaches to determining the actual floor
area of public library (Library Council of New South Wales 2005:17).
The first of the latter tools, a service-based benchmark, is related to
Victorian public library buildings in Section 9.4. The second, a population-
- 29 -
based benchmark, is also discussed in Section 9.4. Both are integral in
developing a benchmark for library service provision in Victoria.
1.3.5 Snapshot of the Victorian public library network
Public library services in Victoria are provided by all 79 Local Government
Authorities, through 45 library services. Of these, 30 are structured as
standalone (single) municipal council services, 14 as public library
corporations through which services are provided to a number of member
councils; and the Vision Australia Information Library Service, which
delivers information and library services in alternate formats to people with a
print disability.
There are 247 public library branches operating in Victoria, with an
additional 27 mobile services and 20 deposit stations. In the year ending
30 June 2004, there were approximately 24,407,000 visits to public libraries
in Victoria, with 2,538,812 registered borrowers (51.5% of the 4,932,422
persons usually resident in Victoria) (ABS 2005:14).
Victorian libraries lend 48,743,783 items per annum (or approximately 19
per member), and deal with 2,580,862 enquiries. The 45 library services
receive funding of $144,932,834 per annum, or $29 per capita. Data
compiled by the National and State Libraries Australasia (NSLA 2007)
identifies that Victoria is the lowest funded State in Australia. The table
below provides comparative data for each State.
2005/06
ACT
NSW
NT
Qld
SA
Tas
Vic
WA
Aust
$45.22
$37.56
$31.14
$38.63
$39.06
$31.05
$28.43
$43.02
$36.07
1.4 Previous audits of public library buildings
1.4.1 Audit of Public Library Buildings in New South Wales
In 2006, BBC Consulting Planners was appointed by the State Library of
New South Wales to undertake an audit of public library buildings in New
South Wales, based on the standards and benchmarks established in People
places. In collaboration with the Steering Committee, comprising
representatives from the State Library of New South Wales, Public Libraries
New South Wales – Metropolitan, Public Libraries New South Wales –
Country (formerly known as the Country Public Libraries Association), and
the Local Government and Shires Associations, BBC developed an
appropriate methodology and online survey tool to encompass the needs of
the Committee’s audit requirements and to reflect the benchmarks reported
in People places.
The online survey was undertaken during November and December 2006
and the results analysed and presented as a draft report in August 2007 as
the first Audit of Public Library Buildings in New South Wales. The survey,
which involved 366 central and branch libraries, asked questions relating to
floorspace and functions, buildings, locational factors and planning and
development.
Reference was made to this document in undertaking the Victorian audit in
order to ensure some consistency and comparability of results.
- 30 -
Case study 2: Kerang Library, Gannawarra Library Service
Gross floor area:
682.6 sq m
User catchment:
Kerang and the shire of Gannawarra is a remote rural
community whose economy revolves around primary
industry.
Shire of Gannawarra pop. 12,500
Cost:
$1.5 million
Architect:
Greenway Hirst and Page
Date completed:
August 2003
Usage:
85,700 annually (2005/06)
Early stages of planning identified community needs which, if met by the
library design, would deliver reciprocal benefits to the library as a vital and
dynamic presence in the community.
The architect’s brief was for a design which would complement the historic
water tower existing on the site and, in addition to library facilities, provide
areas which would benefit and support the wider community.
At no time did the library actively seek donations from the community but
there has been a great deal of community contribution to the building in the
creation and donation of a number of unique features. This library was
achieved through State Government funding, total commitment by the Shire
Council, time and dedication by library staff, and strong community support.
- 31 -
Kerang Library continued
Large windows deliver natural light and those surrounding the recreational
reading area create the illusion of actually being outside. The deep jewel
colours of the interior provide a warm and welcoming environment.
Meeting room facilities, which include work space areas, are in regular use
and historical researchers are increasingly taking advantage of more efficient
access to historical and genealogical resources provided by a purpose built
area. Both the Library and the wider community benefit from the
opportunities the gallery offers for displays of art and craft.
- 32 -
1.4.2 Previous audits in Victoria
In 2001, the Victorian Department of Infrastructure undertook a survey of
public library buildings. This identified basic information and a summary of
key issues relating to age and condition, including:
ƒ
the size of existing library branches;
ƒ
their age;
ƒ
whether they are heritage listed;
ƒ
a summary of their problems; and
ƒ
the approximate cost of repairs required to bring the property to
reasonable condition.
The survey identified significant problems with the age and condition of
many Victorian libraries. In response, the Victorian Government initiated a
Living Libraries Public Library Infrastructure Program which recognised that
many of the State’s current library buildings were inappropriate for
delivering library services that the community requires in the 21st century.
This funding program has contributed to the renewal of public library
infrastructure in many of Victoria’s public libraries. Grants under the Living
Libraries Program are ‘designed to assist Victorian councils and regional
libraries in the provision of high quality and accessible public library
facilities that support the role of public libraries in strengthening
communities’, and ‘aim to:
ƒ
provide new or improved public library infrastructure; and
ƒ
support the role of the public library in strengthening communities as a
meeting place, facilitator of life long learning and provider of free access
to information and reading resources’ (Department of Planning and
Community Development 2008:3).
‘Examples of the types of projects that will be considered for funding include:
ƒ
The construction of a new library for a community that does not have a
public library building.
ƒ
The construction of a library building to replace an existing library.
ƒ
The conversion of an existing non library building for use as a library.
ƒ
The renovation/refurbishment or extension of an existing library
building.
ƒ
The incorporation of a public library space as an element of a broader
community facility.
ƒ
A new mobile library.
ƒ
Interior refurbishment of an existing mobile library.
ƒ
Partial replacement of the mobile library (e.g. replacement of engine,
prime mover, trailer).
Projects that demonstrate flexibility and innovation in meeting the longer
term needs of the community are particularly sought, as are proposals for
libraries that are part of a larger community facility or retail complex’
(Department of Planning and Community Development 2008:4).
- 33 -
1.5 Structure of the report
This report is structured as follows:
Section 1: provides an introduction to the project, including its Terms of
Reference, context and background. It identifies the key policy framework
within which the project is being undertaken, and several key documents
which provide a point of reference and source of information.
Section 2: details the approach undertaken to the Audit, including its
methodology, response rate and limitations.
Section 3: discusses the role of public library buildings in Victoria,
including current value of buildings; past and ongoing capital expenditure;
the amount spent on libraries as a proportion of total LGA budget; and
planned future expenditure. It identifies how buildings are currently utilised,
including their size, and includes an overview of functional areas and
specialist uses of space. The report then tests the Functional Area Size
Guide contained in People places. Finally, it reviews the role of library
buildings in their communities, including comparison to trends evident in
the literature. The section also reviews administration arrangements for
public libraries, including on-site or off-site administration and storage.
Section 4: provides a physical assessment of buildings, including user views
on quality, condition and type of building; accessibility and mobility issues;
facilities such as lighting, signage and user comfort; compliance with Codes
and Regulations such as the Building Code of Australia, fire rating, disability
and Occupational health and safety requirements; and tenure. It reviews
whether buildings are future proof in terms of technology, the changing role
of libraries in the community, and environmental sustainability. Finally, it
concludes on the basis of the above whether buildings are in fact ‘fit for
purpose’.
Section 5: reviews locational characteristics of public libraries, including
proximity to other community facilities; street frontage; and accessibility
both by car, public transport and disability access. It draws conclusions
about whether buildings are in fact in the ‘right’ place in relation to generally
accepted location criteria.
Section 6: provides information on asset management, specifically asset
management planning and maintenance.
Section 7: reviews current planning and development processes, including
planned refurbishment; new buildings planned; and planned replacement
other on the same or a new site. Details provided include the types of works
planned; timeframe; Gross Floor Area; budget; and locational attributes of
new sites where relevant.
Section 8: provides an overview of the results of individual Local
Government Authority audit reports.
Section 9: develops a benchmark of library service provision for Victoria. It
overviews the limitations of the audit methodology in this regard; applies
both service-based and population-based benchmarks, overall and by library
service/LGA; and derives a suggested planning benchmark for Victoria.
Section 10: is the conclusion to the statewide report. It draws implications
from the above and identifies appropriate strategies.
Interspersed in the report are case studies of Victorian public library
buildings as selected by an independent selection panel.
- 34 -
Individual Local Government Authority audit reports were distributed
electronically to each relevant library service manager/CEO in May/June
2008.
The survey tool; a complete list of survey respondents; and tabulated data at
the Local Government Authority and branch library level, is appended.
- 35 -
2. STUDY APPROACH
2.1 Methodology
The Audit was undertaken via an online survey undertaken from 28 May to
1 August 2007. The Audit was conducted in consultation with the
Collections and Access – Standards Workgroup and State Library of Victoria
project staff.
The project was developed over a number of phases:
ƒ
Initial consultation and literature review.
ƒ
Development of survey themes.
ƒ
Pilot survey.
ƒ
Final online survey.
ƒ
Data analysis and output report.
Initially, survey themes were drawn from a workshop with the Workgroup, a
literature review of building audit methodologies and the ideas in People
places (Library Council of New South Wales 2005), and experiences in New
South Wales with a similar audit. Following this, a draft survey was
developed and reviewed by the Workgroup.
A pilot survey was undertaken from 4 to 11 May 2007, comprising five
library services:
ƒ
Eastern Regional Libraries: Ferntree Gully Library and Knox City
Council.
ƒ
Hobsons Bay Libraries: Altona Meadows Library and Hobson Bay City
Council.
ƒ
Goldfields Library Corporation: Kangaroo Flat Library and Greater
Bendigo City Council.
ƒ
Gannawarra Library Service: Kerang Library and Gannawarra Shire
Council.
ƒ
West Gippsland Regional Library Corporation: Warragul Library and Baw
Baw Shire Council.
Feedback about the content and ease-of-use of the survey was elicited from
the participating branches and a number of improvements made.
The final survey comprised two parts:
ƒ
Information relating to each Local Government Authority (LGA) in
Victoria.
ƒ
Information relating to each branch library within each library service in
Victoria.
A separate survey was completed for each LGA and for each library branch
premises. Some of the LGA level information was available from other
sources, and was, therefore, not sought again.
- 36 -
The LGA survey was divided into four parts:
ƒ
Part A. Assessment of Population-based Benchmark of Library Provision.
ƒ
Part B. Assessment of Service-based Benchmark of Library Provision.
ƒ
Part C. Audit of Administration Buildings.
ƒ
Part D. Planning and Development.
The branch survey was divided into five parts:
ƒ
Part A. Floorspace and Function, intended to obtain information on the
floorspace of the library premises and the various functions provided at
the premises.
ƒ
Part B. Design of the Building, intended to obtain information on the age
and condition of the building within which the library is located as well
as the extent to which the library premises complies with current
building design principles.
ƒ
Part C. Location of the Building, intended to obtain information on the
location of the library premises.
ƒ
Part D. Building Management and Maintenance, intended to obtain
information on the management and maintenance of the library
premises.
ƒ
Part E. Planning and Development, intended to obtain information on
library development planning.
Explanatory notes were provided where necessary to explain questions and
assist information collection. Survey respondents’ were required to
collaborate with Council’s building or asset manager, or their library service
manager to source some information.
2.2 Response rate
The survey went online from 28 May 2007. The survey was initially to be
completed over four weeks, by Tuesday 26 June 2007. However, in order to
ensure as high a response rate as possible, this was extended to 1 August
2007.
The State Library of Victoria invested considerable time and effort in several
rounds of follow-up telephone calls and emails encouraging the completion
of outstanding responses from all libraries. A final response rate of 94.9%
of LGAs and 96.5% of branch libraries was achieved. In total, 75 Local
Government Authorities and 244 branch libraries responded.
Due to extenuating circumstances, Corangamite Regional Library
Corporation was unable to complete both the LGA and branch level surveys
in the timeframe allocated. As a result, four LGAs and ten branches are not
included.
Surveys were returned for ‘branches’ at Churchill (Latrobe City Council,
Latrobe City Library Service) and Goldfields Mobile (City of Greater Bendigo,
Goldfields Library Corporation). Following data analysis, it was determined
that these branches should not be defined as buildings in the terms of this
Audit; their inclusion within the dataset has a negligible effect on the
analysis.
- 37 -
2.3 Study limitations
The analysis of the survey responses has revealed a number of limitations to
the study which are important to note:
ƒ
Responses were non-compulsory, allowing respondents to skip some
questions, accidentally or otherwise, which may have affected the
response rate for some questions.
ƒ
Some questions, particularly those related to financial information, had
low response rates. Feedback from respondents identified that this was
either because the information was not available, or could not be
obtained from other Council departments within the survey timeframes.
ƒ
Analysis suggests that a small number of questions are likely to exhibit a
degree of data entry error. For example, estimates of functional floorspace
areas (sq m) exceeding the total GFA of the branch, and the frequency of
non-resident membership at abnormally high levels.
ƒ
The content of some questions, particularly with regards to areas such as
building design, were beyond the scope of knowledge of many library
managers.
Other limitations relate largely to possible misinterpretation of questions
which may have affected some responses. These have been noted, where
relevant, in the textual analysis in the following sections.
- 38 -
3. THE ROLE OF PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS IN
VICTORIA
This section discusses the role of public library buildings in Victoria,
including current value of buildings; past and ongoing capital expenditure;
the amount spent on libraries as a proportion of total LGA budget; and
planned future expenditure. It identifies how buildings are currently utilised,
including their size, and includes an overview of functional areas and
specialist uses of space. The report then tests the Functional Area Size
Guide contained in People places. Finally, it reviews the role of library
buildings in their communities including comparison to trends evident the
literature. This section also reviews administration arrangements for public
libraries, including on-site or off-site administration and storage.
3.1 Administration arrangements
Public library services in Victoria are provided by all 79 Local Government
Authorities, through 45 library services. Of these, 30 are structured as
standalone (single) municipal council services; 14 as public library
corporations through which services are provided to a number of member
councils; and the Vision Australia Information Library Service, which
delivers information and library services in alternate formats to people with a
print disability.
The Audit identified that 28% of LGAs operate some form of on- or off-site
floorspace distinct from branch operations (Table 3.8). This included
administration space (21.3%), storage space (17.3%) as well as other forms
of space (12%). Other forms of space included: mobile library parking; Rural
Transaction Centres; technical services; and outreach services. The
distribution of floorspaces for these centralised uses is identified in Table
3.9. These spaces have been described as appropriate within relevant
sections of the report.
3.2 The value of public library buildings
The current local and state investment in Australian public libraries is only
about $600 million per annum, representing approximately seven cents per
Australian per day or the cost of one book/CD/DVD per annum
(Bundy 2006b:4). Research has shown that the return on public investment
in public libraries is likely to be between $2.50 and $5.50 for every dollar
invested. ‘No public investment demonstrably returns a higher dividend’
(Bundy 2003:3).
It has been estimated that individual local government annual investment in
public libraries ranges from less than 1% per annum of rate revenue to over
7%. Generally, percentages of rate revenue allocated to libraries by country
authorities are smaller than in urban areas (Bundy 2003:3).
Libraries are more than a financial consideration. As discussed in Section 0,
libraries are increasingly being recognised as an essential place for building
social capital. Libraries are places which also provide intangible and indirect
benefits to the communities in which they are located. Libraries:
ƒ
are public anchors for neighbourhoods and communities;
- 39 -
ƒ
are acknowledged as safe, welcoming, neutral spaces open to all in the
community;
ƒ
are relevant to the needs of the communities they serve;
ƒ
draw people to town centres and so contribute to economic activity;
ƒ
provide people with personal space which is an alternative to shopping
and commercial entertainment; and
ƒ
support important early cognitive development through early learning
activities (Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2003:9).
3.2.1 Value of buildings
The financial value of buildings was established by asking the total
insurance value of library buildings, excluding building contents. The year of
the assessment was also asked. The value of internal assets was not
assessed, having recently canvassed by the Strategic Asset Audit of Victorian
Public Libraries (J.L. Management Services 2006).
Table 3.1: Total insurance value of building (Q.37)
Building value
Branches*
%
<$250,000
17
10.1%
$250,000–$499,999
15
8.9%
$500,000–$749,999
14
8.3%
$750,000–$999,999
10
5.9%
$1,000,000–$1,499,999
25
14.8%
$1,500,000–$1,999,999
19
11.2%
$2,000,000–$2,999,999
23
13.6%
$3,000,000>
46
27.2%
169
100%
Total
* 75 branches (30.7%) did not complete this question
Library building values spanned a wide range of values, from library
buildings which were under $250,000 to those over $3 million. The most
common frequency was those over $3 million, comprising 27.2% of library
buildings. There was also a cluster of library buildings between $1 million
and under $3 million; in total two-thirds (66.8%) of all library buildings were
worth $1 million or more. At the other end of the scale, 10.1% of library
buildings were valued at less than $250,000.
While not entirely accurate, given the variation in library investment between
LGAs, application of this average across the entire population of Victoria
would suggest a total value of library buildings in the State of $522 million.
The variation in library investment by size of LGA is apparent from the
following table.
- 40 -
Table 3.2: Value of buildings in an LGA by LGA population (Q.37)
LGA Population
LGA Total
Building Value
<10,000
10,000–
49,999
50,000–
99,999
100,000–
149,999
150,000>
No. of
LGAs*
50.0%
50.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2
(5.0%)
$250,000–$499,999
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3
(7.5%)
$500,000–$749,999
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
(0%)
$750,000–$999,999
0.0%
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1
(2.5%)
$1,000,000–$1,499,999
40.0%
60.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
5
(12.5%)
$1,500,000–$1,999,999
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
(0%)
$2,000,000–$2,999,999
0.0%
66.7%
33.3%
0.0%
0.0%
3
(7.5%)
$3,000,000>
0.0%
19.2%
34.6%
26.9%
19.2%
6
12
10
7
5
<$250,000
Total
* 40 LGAs provided complete valuation data (53.3%); 35 LGAs did not complete all relevant
questions
The date of the insurance assessment at which this financial value was
measured also varied considerably. However, in two-thirds of cases (68.1%),
valuations were undertaken in either 2006 or 2007; 23.1% of libraries did
not complete the date of their insurance assessment.
Table 3.3: Year of valuation (Q.37)
Year
Unknown
Branches*
39
%
23.1%
2004
4
2.4%
2005
11
6.5%
2006
52
30.8%
2007
63
37.3%
169
100%
Total
* 75 branches (30.7%) did not complete this question
While there may be a correlation between a buildings’ valuation and whether
or not it was collocated, it cannot be established from the audit data.
- 41 -
26
(65.0%)
40
3.2.2 Capital expenditure
Respondents were asked to state the capital expenditure on each branch
library building in the 2006/07 financial year. This information is shown in
Table 3.4 below.
Table 3.4: Capital expenditure on branch libraries (Q.40)
Capital
expenditure
2006/07
2007/08
Branches*
%
Branches*
<$500
0
0%
1
1.3%
$500–$999
3
3.4%
1
1.3%
11.2%
7
9.2%
6.7%
5
6.6%
12.4%
9
11.8%
6.7%
4
5.3%
$1,000–$2,499
10
$2,500–$4,999
6
$5,000–$7,499
11
$7,500–$9,999
6
%
$10,000–$49,999
34
38.2%
28
36.8%
$50,000–$99,999
9
10.1%
8
10.5%
$100,000–$249,999
3
3.4%
6
7.9%
$250,000
7
7.9%
7
9.2%
89
100%
76
100%
Total
* 155 branches for 2006/07 (63.5%) and 158 branches for 2007/08 (68.9%) did not complete
this question
There was a total capital expenditure on libraries in 2006/07 of $14,437,881
(however, only 89 branches (36.5%) supplied data). The median value was
$10,500 and the average was $162,223. If it was assumed that the balance
of branches made similar levels of capital expenditure, up to $40 million per
annum could be spent on library buildings. Limited confidence is held with
the accuracy of this estimate, given the variations in the data underlying
such an assumption, and fluctuations year on year.
The majority of branches (59.6%) had received capital expenditure of over
$10,000 in the preceding financial year; 30.3% received between $1,000 and
under $5,000. Only 3.4% received less than $1,000.
The projected capital expenditure on library branches in the 2007/08
financial year is also shown in Table 3.4. This showed that an even higher
proportion (64.5% of branch libraries) anticipated receiving more than
$10,000 in the next financial year. The distribution was similar to the
2006/07 financial year.
- 42 -
Case study 3: Sydenham Library, Brimbank Libraries
Gross floor area:
1,000 sq m
User catchment:
Taylors Ward, Brimbank City Council: Calder Park,
Delahey, Hillside, Keilor Lodge, Keilor North, Sydenham,
Taylors Lakes.
Population: 53,425 (2006)
Cost:
$5.5 million
Architect:
Scott Jennings
A2 Architects
Scott is now with Freeform Architects
Date completed:
November 2006
Usage:
December 2006–April 2007
New memberships: 3,614
Loans: 134,725
Door count: 61,422
Internet sessions booked: 24,669
Sydenham Library is a key part of the designated Transit City around
Sydenham railway station. The local community wanted a ‘significant’
building, internally and externally, which would engender community pride.
The multilingual graphic on the unique external skin makes a strong
statement of welcome and inclusion to all at Brimbank’s northern gateway.
- 43 -
Sydenham Library continued
The community wanted a contemporary space, with a dynamic feel,
including display spaces and a meeting room. The library’s internal space is
open and welcoming with minimal internal barriers. The core of the space is
the IT area with 40 IT pods, which buzzes with children and teenagers doing
homework or playing games and adult patrons making the most of the
comfortable, private working spaces. All spaces are reconfigurable so the
library can change to meet changing community needs.
They also wanted comfortable seating in welcoming spaces with signage and
lighting that ‘makes a statement’. The library has a spacious, warm
appearance with contemporary colours and furniture arranged in social
groupings.
It is already a local landmark and the focus of community learning and
recreation.
- 44 -
3.2.3 Library expenditure as a proportion of total Local Government
Authority budget
Library services were asked the total capital expenditure budget of their LGA
for the 2006/07 financial year and for the next three years; the proportion of
the LGA budget spent on libraries was then calculated. This is shown in
Tables 3.5 and 3.6. It should be noted that increasing proportions of
respondents were unable to provide this information over time, ranging from
one-third (33.3%) of library services in 2006/07 to more than half (53.3%) in
2009/10.
Table 3.5: Overall LGA capital expenditure: 2006/07 to 2009/10 (Q.8)
LGA capital
expenditure
budget
2006/07
LGAs*
2007/08
%
<$500,000
13
26.0%
$500,000–
$999,999
2
4.0%
$1,000,000–
$1,499,999
0
0.0%
$1,500,000–
$9,999,999
14
28.0%
LGAs*
11
2008/09
%
LGAs*
2009/10
%
LGAs*
%
22.4%
8
20.0%
7
20.0%
2
4.1%
1
2.5%
0
0.0%
2
4.1%
1
2.5%
2
5.7%
10
20.4%
8
20.0%
4
11.4%
8
16.3%
9
22.5%
9
25.7%
25.0%
9
25.7%
$10,000,000–
$19,999,999
4
$20,000,000–
$29,999,999
12
24.0%
10
20.4%
10
$30,000,000>
5
10.0%
6
12.2%
3
7.5%
4
11.4%
50
100%
49
100%
40
100%
35
100%
Total
8.0%
* LGAs not completing this question: 2006/07 – 25; 2007/08 – 26; 2008/09 – 35; 2009/10 – 40
The data shows that among libraries services that were able to provide the
relevant data:
ƒ
In 2006/07, approximately one-quarter of library services (26%) were in
LGAs where the total capital expenditure budget of the LGA was under
$500,000; one-quarter (28%) were in LGAs where the budget was
between $1.5 million and under $10 million; one-quarter (24%) were in
LGAs with budgets between $20 million and under $30 million; and the
remainder were distributed across other categories. Ten percent (10%) of
library services were in LGAs with a total capital expenditure budget of
$30 million and over.
ƒ
In 2007/08, the distribution was similar, but with a doubling of the
proportion of LGAs with capital expenditure budgets in the $10 million to
under $20 million range to 16.3% and a consequent reduction of the
above proportions from one-quarter to around one-fifth; 12.2% of LGAs
had budgets of $30 million and over.
- 45 -
ƒ
In 2008/09, the proportion of LGAs with capital expenditure budgets of
$30 million and over declined to 7.5%, and the above proportions slightly
increased again in all but the category of LGAs under $500,000, which
remained at 20%. The category of LGAs with budgets in the $10 million
to under $20 million range continued to increase to 22.5%.
ƒ
By 2009/10, the proportion of LGAs with capital expenditure budgets
over $30 million was expected to again have risen to 11.4%, and onequarter of LGAs to have budgets between $10 and under $20 million, and
between $20 million and under $30 million. The proportion of LGAs in
the lowest category, with budgets of under $500,000, again remained at
20%.
It should be recognised that the above data suffers from the large number of
Not Stated replies and should consequently be treated with caution. In
general, it can be interpreted as showing a decline in the number of LGAs
with very low capital expenditure budgets (under $500,000) and a gradual,
although inconsistent, increase in those with budgets above $10 million for
capital expenditure.
3.2.4 Summary of future planned expenditure
Library branches were asked their likely budget for capital building and
internal assets such as shelving, etc. within the next five years (to the
nearest $100,000). The information provided is summarised in Table 3.6.
Table 3.6: Future planned expenditure over next five years (Q.44d)
Future planned
expenditure
Number of branches
responding
Total amount
(responding)
Average planned
expenditure per branch
Anticipated
capital building
expenditure
Anticipated
internal assets
expenditure
301
232
$45,897,900
$5,726,200
$1,529,930
$248,965
1
18 branches (62.5%) undertaking works did not complete this question
2
25 branches (47.9%) undertaking works did not complete this question
Table 3.6 indicates that libraries are planning to undertake expenditure on
capital building of nearly $46 million over the next five years; anticipated
expenditure on internal assets (excluding book stock and other resources) is
approximately $5.7 million. The anticipated average capital building budget
(where provided) for those libraries planning to undertake work is
approximately $1.53 million, with $249,000 on internal works; however,
these ranged from $7.5 million to $100 in the case of capital building works
and $1.75 million to $200 in the case of internal assets. Ten libraries were
undertaking capital building over $1 million, and three were undertaking
internal asset refurbishment over the same amount.
Further information on proposed planning and development of libraries is
provided in Section 7.
- 46 -
3.3 Utilisation of public library buildings
A series of questions were asked to ascertain standard floorspace and
function details of each library. These questions were drawn from the
benchmarks set out in People places (Library Council of New South
Wales 2005). They also reflect the questions included in the New South
Wales Audit of Public Library Buildings (BBC Consulting Planners 2007).
Despite perceptions that less space is needed in libraries, there is no
evidence that this is true. In fact, the variety of new functions expected in
libraries is contributing to demands for even more space. Several projects
underway across Australia are tripling the floorspace areas of the 1970s and
1980s buildings they are replacing (Jones 2004). Library users, like
shoppers, need 60% of the library’s floorspace to browse comfortably, leaving
40% of space for shelving and other fittings (Bundy 2006). However, too
many libraries reverse this ratio due to lack of space.
3.3.1 Size of buildings
Respondents were asked the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of branch library
premises. GFA was defined as:
the sum of the floor area of each storey of a building measured from the
internal face of external walls, or from the internal face of walls
separating the building from any other building and includes:
(a) the area of a mezzanine within the storey,
but EXCLUDES
(b) any area for common vertical circulation, such as lifts and stairs,
and
(c) vehicular access, loading areas, garbage and services, and
(d) plant rooms, lift towers and other areas used exclusively for
mechanical services or ducting, and
(e) car parking (including access to that car parking), and
(f) any space used for the loading or unloading of goods (including
access to it), and
(g) terraces and balconies, and
(h) void spaces.
Additionally, for the purposes of the branch library survey, it was deemed to
include both public and staff spaces and exclude library service level
administration space (both on- and off-site). The GFA of any such spaces
used by the library service was separately measured in the LGA survey.
The results for branches are shown in Table 3.7 and for centralised services
in Table 3.9.
- 47 -
Table 3.7: Gross Floor Area of branch libraries (Q.11)
GFA
Branches*
%
<150 sq m
35
14.6%
150–249 sq m
44
18.4%
250–499 sq m
54
22.6%
500–999 sq m
51
21.3%
1,000–1,499 sq m
36
15.1%
1,500–1,999 sq m
14
5.9%
5
2.1%
239
100%
2,000> sq m
Total
*Five branches did not complete this question
The highest proportion of branch libraries is between 250–499 sq m (22.6%
of respondents) and 500–999 sq m (21.3%). Only 2.1%, or five libraries, were
over 2,000 sq m; 14.6% were less than 150 sq m. This can be compared with
the recommended minimum size for a public library of 139 sq m GFA (State
Library of New South Wales 1995:24). Thirty-three of the 240 branches
(13.8%) that supplied floorspace information are less than the 139 sq m GFA
minimum recommended size for a public library building. All but one of
these branches are in rural or regional LGAs.
Twenty-eight percent of LGAs separately operated some form of on- or offsite floorspace distinct from branch operations (Table 3.8). This included
administration space (21.3%), storage space (17.3%), as well as other forms
of space (12%). Other forms of space included mobile library parking, Rural
Transaction Centres, technical services and outreach services. The
distribution of floorspaces for these centralised uses is identified in
Table 3.9.
Central administration areas are generally small, with 45.5% of those areas
for which sizes were identified being between 50–99 sq m in size. A few
(three, or 27.3% of those areas for which sizes were identified) central
administration areas were substantial, being between 500–999 sq m in size.
Table 3.8: LGAs with central operations floorspace (Q.6a)
Central
operations
with
floorspace
Overall
LGAs*
Administration
%
LGAs*
%
Storage
LGAs*
Other Areas
%
LGAs*
%
Yes
21
28.0%
16
21.3%
13
17.3%
9
12.0%
No
54
72.0%
59
78.7%
62
82.7%
66
88.0%
Total
75
100%
75
100%
75
100%
75
100%
* Four LGAs did not respond to this survey
- 48 -
Table 3.9: Size of LGA central operations floorspace (Q.6b)
Administration
Size of
floorspace
LGAs
Storage
%
LGAs
Other Areas
%
LGAs
%
<5 sq m
0
0.0%
2
22.2%
0
0.0%
5–9 sq m
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
0
0.0%
10–24 sq m
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
0
0.0%
<25 sq m
1
6.3%
4
44.4%
2
22.2%
25–49 sq m
0
0.0%
4
44.4%
0
0.0%
50–99 sq m
5
31.3%
1
11.1%
0
0.0%
100–199 sq m
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
200–499 sq m
2
12.5%
0
0.0%
4
44.4%
500–999 sq m
3
18.8%
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
16*
100%
9
100%
7**
100%
Total
* Of the 21 LGAs who answered yes as identified in Table 3.8, five (31.3%) LGAs did not
complete this question
** Of the 21 LGAs who answered yes as identified in Table 3.8, two (22.2%) LGAs did not
complete this question
Libraries were asked about the number of storeys their floorspace area was
situated over. A total of 205 libraries, representing 84%, are located on a
single level of a building, while 12.7% of libraries contained two levels and
2.9% contained three levels (the maximum number of levels indicated)
(Table 3.10).
Table 3.10: Number of levels utilised by library branches (Q.13a)
Levels
Branches*
%
One
205
84.0%
Two
31
12.7%
Three
7
2.9%
Total
243
100%
* One branch did not complete this question
However, a number of library branches which operated over two or three
storeys indicated that not all of these levels admitted public access2. Fifteen
(39.5%) of libraries which operate over more than one storey did not allow
public access to one or more levels (Table 3.11).
2 This does not refer to disabled access, which is addressed in Section 4.5.
- 49 -
Table 3.11: Publicly accessible levels of library branches (Q.13b)
Number of Publicly Accessible Levels
One
Levels
Two
Two
Branches
%
Branches
Three
%
Total
Branches
%
12
38.7%
19
61.3%
0
0.0%
Three
1
14.3%
2
28.6%
4
Total
13
34.2%
21
55.3%
4
Branches
%
31
100%
57.1%
7
100%
10.5%
38
100%
Libraries were also asked to indicate whether at least part of their library
was located on the ground floor with street frontage, which was found to be
the case in 230 (94.3%) of all Victorian libraries.
Overall, only 14.8% of libraries contained a lift (either passenger or goods).
Of those libraries not located on the ground floor (nine libraries), only one
had a passenger lift somewhere within the building to facilitate access (Table
3.12). Of those libraries which contained a lift, three (8.3%) indicated that
the lift did not service all levels of the library; these are important
accessibility shortcomings. Further details of lift access within buildings are
provided in Table 3.13.
Table 3.12: Lift access from street (Q.13d)
At least
part of
library
located
on ground
floor with
street
frontage
Availability of lift
Yes, patrons
Branches
%
Yes, patrons &
goods
Yes, goods
Branches
%
Branches
%
No lift*
Branches
Total
%
Branches
%
Yes
3
1.3%
9
3.9%
23
10.0%
195
84.8%
230
100%
No
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
8
88.9%
9
100%
* Four branches did not complete this question
Table 3.13: Lift access – within building (Q.13b)*(Q.13d)
Publicly
accessible
levels
No lift
Branches
Lift, patrons
%
Branches
%
Lift, patrons &
goods
Lift, goods
Branches
%
Branches
One
199
93.4%
1
0.5%
7
3.3%
6
Two
4
18.2%
2
9.1%
1
4.5%
15
Three
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
25.0%
3
* Four branches did not complete this question
- 50 -
%
2.8%
Total
Branches
%
213
100%
68.2%
22
100%
75.0%
4
100%
Case study 4: Drouin Library, West Gippsland Regional Library Corporation
Gross floor area:
562.63m2
User catchment:
The catchment area is defined by the Drouin zone.
Cost:
$175,000
Architect:
Caba Design
Date completed:
19 April 2007
Usage:
Loans: 49,612
Visits: 25,464
(June 2005–July 2006)
The Drouin Library is an example of a transformational refurbishment
making best use of available resources. The library is collocated with the
Drouin RSL, Drouin Toy Library, and Drouin Historical Society in a building
that was opened in 1922.
Before the current refurbishment, the space was tired, old-fashioned and
drab with poor lighting. Access to the building was poor. Underutilised
floorspace and shelving height was also a problem. The library had no airconditioning and an inefficient heating system. In 2006, Baw Baw Shire
Council was awarded a Living Libraries grant to refurbish the library.
The refurbishment was completed in nine weeks and has transformed the
library into a modern, attractive community space. It features a dedicated
youth space with ottomans and custom-made tables for group study.
- 51 -
Drouin Library continued
The children’s area now includes a dedicated story time area with modern
children’s furniture. This area will also feature a large mural on the wall with
an Australian animals theme which is not yet completed.
The implementation of automatic doors has improved disabled access. There
is also a relaxing reading area with comfortable furniture. Use of colour,
improved lighting and comfortable furniture has created an inviting and
welcoming environment.
- 52 -
3.3.2 Number of visitors
Libraries were asked how many people, on average, visited each branch per
week. These results are shown in Table 3.14.
Table 3.14: Visitors per week (Q.10)
Visitors per week
0
Branches*
2
%
0.8%
<500
56
23.0%
500–999
33
13.6%
1,000–2,499
61
25.1%
2,500–4,999
65
26.7%
5,000–7,499
20
8.2%
7,500–8,999
5
2.1%
9,000>
1
0.4%
243
100%
Total
* One branch did not complete this question
Table 3.14 shows that the highest proportions of libraries have either 1,0002,499 visitors each week (25.1%) or 2,500–4,999 visitors per week (26.7%).
Significantly smaller proportions have 5,000 visitors per week or more
(10.7%), with one library having over 9,000 visitors per week. Fifty-eight
(23.8%) libraries had less than 500 visitors per week, including two which
had no visitors.
As expected, the number of visitors per week on average correlates strongly
with the GFA of public libraries (Table 3.15); that is, generally speaking, the
larger a library, the more people visit it. This is not to say that the size of a
library creates its demand. It is apparent, however, that some branches are
‘working harder’ than others. The number of visitors per square metre of
floorspace ranges from 0.44 to 24.39.
- 53 -
Table 3.15: Number of visitors by library size (Q.10)*(Q.11)
Gross Floor Area (sq m)
Visitors per
week
<150*
150–249
250–499
500–999
1,000–
1,499
1,500–
1,999
2,000>*
<500
29
(85.3%)
18
(40.9%)
8
(14.8%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
500–999
4
(11.8%)
15
(34.1%)
13
(24.1%)
1
(2.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1,000–
2,499
0
(0.0%)
8
(18.2%)
28
(51.9%)
16
(31.4%)
4
(11.1%)
2
(14.3%)
0
(0.0%)
2,500–
4,999
0
(0.0%)
2
(4.5%)
5
(9.3%)
30
(58.8%)
21
(58.3%)
6
(42.9%)
1
(20.0%)
5,000–
7,499
0
(0.0%)
1
(2.3%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(5.9%)
10
(27.8%)
5
(35.7%)
1
(20.0%)
7,500–
8,999
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(2.0%)
1
(2.8%)
1
(7.1%)
2
(40.0%)
Total
34
(100%)
44
(100%)
54
(100%)
51
(100%)
36
(100%)
14
(100%)
5
(100%)
* One branch did not complete this question
3.3.3 Total operating hours
The average total operating hours per week of branch libraries are shown in
Table 3.16.
Table 3.16: Operating hours per week (Q.9)
Operating
hours
0
Branches
%
1
0.4%
<15
19
7.8%
15–29
41
16.8%
30–39
46
18.9%
40–59
109
44.7%
28
11.5%
244
100%
60>
Total
Table 3.16 shows that the modal category of operating hours per week was
by far 40–59 hours; 44.7% of libraries fell within this category. Only 11.5%
of libraries exceeded this category, opening 60 or more hours; 8.2% of
libraries opened less than 15 hours per week, with one of these currently
having no opening hours.
- 54 -
As expected, the number of visitors per week positively correlated with the
average number of opening hours of libraries (Table 3.17). Again, it is
apparent that some libraries are ‘working harder’ than others. The number
of people visiting libraries in Victoria ranged from 0.67 to 196.7 people per
hour.
Table 3.17: Number of visitors by hours of operation (Q.9)*(Q.10)
Operating
hours per
week
Visitors each week
<500
500–
999
1,000–
2,499
2,500–
4,999
5,000–
7,499
7,500–
8,999
9,000>
Total
19
(100%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
19
(100%)
15–29
24
(58.5%)
12
(29.3%)
5
(12.2%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
41
(100%)
30–39
10
(21.7%)
16
(34.8%)
17
(37.0%)
2
(4.3%)
1
(2.2%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
46
(100%)
40–59
3
(2.8%)
5
(4.6%)
37
(34.3%)
48
(44.4%)
12
(11.1%)
2
(1.9%)
0
(0.0%)
108
(100%)
60>
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(7.1%)
15
(53.6%)
7
(25.0%)
3
(10.7%)
1
(3.6%)
28
(100%)
56
(23.0%)
33
(13.6%)
61
(25.1%)
65
(26.7%)
20
(8.2%)
5
(2.1%)
1
(0.4%)
243
(100%)
<15
Total*
* One branch did not complete this question
3.3.4 Overview of functional areas
The literature suggests that the number of functions preformed by the
modern library, and consequently the number of spaces within it, is
increasing. Bundy provides examples of attractive and welcoming libraries in
Australia and New Zealand often complete with facilities such as learning
centres, homework centres, youth zones, electronic training suites, generous
display areas, local studies rooms, comfortable lounge areas, Friends of the
Library rooms, Justice of the Peace rooms, coffee shops and meeting rooms
(2006:1).
Respondents to the Audit were asked to identify the GFA of the main
functional areas of their libraries. Six broad types of core functional areas
are identified by People places: collection areas, reading and study areas,
resource areas, staff areas, amenities and storage areas, and additional
service areas. Each of these functional areas required the identification of
separate floorspace data in the Audit.
It was acknowledged that there may be some crossover of area usage; the
instructions asked for areas to be allocated to their dominant use. Some
libraries did not have specific functional areas in each category; these are
indicated as ‘0’. Preparation of the LGA reports suggests that the functional
areas GFA data appears, in a number of cases, to have been entered in error,
as the sum of all functional areas exceeds the total GFA of the branch. It is
likely that such errors have arisen due to manual room measurement and
- 55 -
approximations being made. Tables 3.18–3.23 present this data. The
following analysis should be considered in this respect.
Collection areas
Collection areas include: books on shelves, periodicals, non-print materials,
toy libraries, and digital and virtual resources. The provision of these is
shown in Table 3.18.
Table 3.18: Functional area – Collections (Q.12a)
Collections areas
(sq m)
Branches*
0
%
1
0.4%
1–49
35
15.5%
50–149
62
27.4%
150–299
54
23.9%
300–449
43
19.0%
450–599
11
4.9%
600>
20
8.8%
Total
226
100%
* 18 branches (7.4%) did not complete this question
The highest proportion of libraries (27.4%) had between 50–149 sq m of
floorspace used for collections. Another 23.9% of libraries had between 150–
299 sq m and 19% between 300–449 sq m. A much lower proportion of
libraries (15.5%) had less than 49 sq m of floorspace for collections, and
13.7% of libraries had over 450 sq m, with 20 of these having over 600 sq m.
Reading and study areas
Reading and study areas include: meeting areas, study areas, browsing,
display and information areas/exhibition space, young adult area, multipurpose rooms (training, AV), children’s storytelling area, specialist genre
collection area, and specialist rooms (e.g. local and family history).
Table 3.19 shows the floor areas used for these.
Table 3.19: Functional area – Reading and study (Q.12b)
Reading and study
areas (sq m)
Branches*
%
0
17
7.6%
1–24
47
21.1%
25–49
45
20.2%
50–199
73
32.7%
200–349
28
12.6%
- 56 -
Reading and study
areas (sq m)
Branches*
%
350–499
9
4.0%
500>
4
1.8%
Total
223
100%
* 21 branches (8.6%) did not complete this question
The modal frequency for provision of reading and study areas was in the
category of 50–199 sq m of floorspace. Nearly one-third of libraries (32.7%)
fell into this category; 20.2% of libraries had between 25–49 sq m for reading
and study areas, and another 21.1% had between 1–24 sq m. Seventeen
libraries indicated they had no space mainly for this purpose; 18.4% of
libraries had 200 sq m used for reading and study areas, with four of these
libraries having over 500 sq m.
Resource areas
Resources areas include: returns and enquiries desk, service desk, internet
terminals, catalogues, printers, photocopiers, vending machines, and
telephones. The floor area used for these is shown in Table 3.20.
Table 3.20: Functional area – Resource (Q.12c)
Resource areas (sq m)
0
1–9
Branches*
%
9
4.0%
25
11.1%
10–49
100
44.4%
50–99
50
22.2%
100–199
31
13.8%
200–299
8
3.6%
300>
2
0.9%
Total
225
100%
* 19 branches (7.8%) did not complete this question
A large proportion of libraries (44.4%) provided between 10–49 sq m of
floorspace for resource areas. The next highest category was 50–99 sq m,
which was provided by another 22.2 % of libraries; 18.3% of libraries
provided over 100 sq m, with two libraries providing over 300 sq m. Thirtyfour (15.1%) libraries provided less than 10 sq m with nine of those libraries
having no space for resource areas.
Staff areas
Staff areas include: all back-of-house areas (e.g. back workrooms, lunch
rooms, offices), as well as staff work areas, office space and storage (for
archival materials). Table 3.21 shows the area used for these.
- 57 -
Table 3.21: Functional area – Staff (Q.12d)
Staff areas (sq m)
0
Branches*
%
8
3.6%
1–24
65
29.5%
25–49
46
20.9%
50–299
92
41.8%
300–499
5
2.3%
500–799
3
1.4%
800>
1
0.5%
Total
220
100%
* 24 branches (9.8%) did not complete this question
By far the highest proportion of libraries (41.8%) used between 50–299 sq m
of floorspace for staff areas. However, 29.5% of libraries used between 1–24
sq m for staff areas, another 20.9% used between 25–49 sq m, and eight had
no staff areas, totalling 54% of libraries with functional areas for staff of less
than 50 sq m. Very few libraries (4.2%) had more than 300 sq m for staff
areas.
Amenities areas
Amenities areas include: foyer, lobby, corridors/circulation space, public,
staff and accessible toilets, restrooms, plant equipment, storage (for
maintenance equipment), and maintenance areas. Areas used for these
functions are shown in Table 3.22.
Table 3.22: Functional area – Amenities (Q.12e)
Amenities areas (sq m)
Branches*
%
0
10
4.7%
1–19
50
23.6%
20–49
46
21.7%
50–149
72
34.0%
150–299
19
9.0%
300–449
10
4.7%
450>
5
2.4%
Total
212
100%
* 32 branches (13.1%) did not complete this question
The modal category for provision of amenities areas was between 50–149
sq m; however, 23.6% of libraries used between 1–19 sq m and another
20.9% between 25–49 sq m. Ten libraries had no area for amenities.
- 58 -
A small number of libraries had very large areas for amenities, including 9%
between 150–299 sq m, 4.7% with between 300–449 sq m, and 2.4% with
over 450 sq m; the latter does not appear to be reliable data.
Other areas
Other areas include: bookshops, coffee shops, community services, bank
services, Council customer services, etc. These are shown in Table 3.23.
Table 3.23: Functional area – Other (Q.12f)
Other areas (sq m)
0
1–14
Branches*
%
90
62.1%
8
5.5%
15–49
14
9.7%
50–99
7
4.8%
100–199
10
6.9%
200>
16
11.0%
Total
145
100%
* 99 branches (40.6%) did not complete this question
Nearly two-thirds of libraries did not have other areas (62.1%). Of those that
did, in 11% (16 libraries) had areas 200 sq m and more; 6.9% (10 libraries)
had areas between 100–199 sq m. Other libraries were distributed between
the two extremes; there appears some polarisation in regard to different
types of libraries in this respect.
Other functional areas identified by branch libraries predominately included:
space for collocated services, e.g. Council services, visitor information centre,
professional office suites, consulting rooms, and English language and
literacy. Other areas included: space for community groups, coffee shops,
and community halls. Further information on such uses is discussed in the
following Section 3.3.5.
3.3.5 Specialist uses of space
Libraries were asked whether they provided floorspace regularly used for a
number of other types of services identified in People places. Respondents
were asked to indicate whether they provided that area exclusively (i.e. not
shared), shared with other uses, or not at all. These responses are tabulated
in Table 3.24.
- 59 -
Table 3.24: Provision of specialist floorspace (Q.14)
Specialist
floorspace
No
Yes,
exclusive
Yes,
shared
Total*
71
(29.2%)
67
(27.6%)
105
(43.2%)
243
(100%)
15
(6.2%)
93
(38.3%)
135
(55.6%)
243
(100%)
Toy library
235
(96.7%)
5
(2.1%)
3
(1.2%)
243
(100%)
Specialist genre
collection
134
(55.1%)
54
(22.2%)
55
(22.6%)
243
(100%)
Specialist rooms
(e.g. local & family
history)
187
(77.0%)
38
(15.6%)
18
(7.4%)
243
(100%)
Multi-purpose room
133
(54.7%)
55
(22.6%)
55
(22.6%)
243
(100%)
Mobile library
services area
225
(92.6%)
5
(2.1%)
13
(5.3%)
243
(100%)
Community services,
bank services,
Council customer
service
208
(85.6%)
12
(4.9%)
23
(9.5%)
243
(100%)
Exhibition space
144
(59.3%)
22
(9.1%)
77
(31.7%)
243
(100%)
Bookshop, coffee
shop, gift shop
240
(98.8%)
2
(0.8%)
1
(0.4%)
243
(100%)
Computer lab/
internet area
52
(21.4%)
90
(37.0%)
101
(41.6%)
243
(100%)
Wireless internet
220
(90.5%)
6
(2.5%)
17
(7.0%)
243
(100%)
Staff lunchroom
48
(19.8%)
137
(56.4%)
58
(23.9%)
243
(100%)
Office space
54
(22.2%)
164
(67.5%)
25
(10.3%)
243
(100%)
Storage area (for
archival materials)
175
(72.0%)
43
(17.7%)
25
(10.3%)
243
(100%)
Young adult area
Children’s
storytelling area
* One branch did not complete this question
A children’s storytelling area was the most common type of other specialist
use of space with 93.9% of libraries providing the service. A relatively large
proportion of libraries (55.6%) provided it in a shared space; 38.3% provided
it as an exclusive space.
- 60 -
The second most common type of other specialist space provided was staff
lunchrooms (80.2% of libraries); 56.4% of these were for exclusive use, and
23.9% were shared. Office space was provided in a further 77.8% of
libraries, with 67.5% of these being exclusive and only 10.3% shared, the
highest proportion of exclusive space provided for specialist purposes.
Computer labs/Internet areas were the third most commonly provided type
of other specialist space; 78.6% of libraries provided space for this purpose.
However, this space was shared in 41.6% of cases and exclusive in 37%.
Provision of a young adult area was the next most common type of other
specialist space provided; 70.8% of libraries provided an area for young
adults. Like internet areas, in a relatively large number of libraries (43.2%)
this was shared, while it was exclusive in 27.6% of libraries.
No other type of specialist space was provided by more than half of the
libraries. A multi-purpose room was provided by 45.3% of libraries; this
was shared in half of the cases (22.6% of libraries), and exclusive in the
other half (another 22.6%).
An area for specialist genre collections was provided in 44.9% of libraries.
Floorspace provided for this purpose was similarly almost equally either
shared or exclusive.
Exhibition space was provided in 40.7% of libraries. This was also
commonly shared (31.7% of libraries), with only 9.1% of libraries having an
exclusive space.
Storage areas (for archival materials) were provided by a 28% of libraries.
In 17.7% of libraries, these were exclusive areas; 10.3% were shared. A
specialist room for local and family history was provided by 23% of
libraries; 15.6% of libraries provided this space on an exclusive basis; and
7.4% were shared.
Some libraries (14.4%) also provide space for community services, bank
services or Council customer service areas; 9.5% of libraries provided this
space shared, and 4.9% exclusively.
Small proportions of libraries provided space for other purposes: 9.5% for a
wireless internet area; 7.4% for a mobile library services area; 3.3% for a
toy library; and 1.2% (only three libraries) for a bookshop, coffee shop or
gift shop.
Libraries (9.5%) provided space for a variety of other purposes. The types of
space provided included:
ƒ
Study space/group or individual study rooms (seven libraries).
ƒ
Workrooms or particular kinds of offices (seven).
ƒ
Special areas, such as volunteer areas, or programs and events areas
(e.g. English language and literacy program) (two).
ƒ
Kitchens or kitchenettes, e.g. for community groups (two).
ƒ
Internal courtyard (one).
ƒ
Electronic games room (one).
- 61 -
3.4 The social role of library buildings in their communities
The Libraries Building Communities research undertaken by the State Library
of Victoria and the Victorian public library network demonstrated that
libraries make a fundamental contribution to our communities in four key
areas, by:
ƒ
providing free public access to computer and information technology
resources;
ƒ
creating better informed communities by helping people locate
information;
ƒ
running programs that promote life long learning and literacy in the
community; and
ƒ
building connections between individuals, groups and government
(Library Board of Victoria, Executive Summary, 2005:5).
Furthermore, the facilities and services which public libraries provide are
changing to meet new cultural needs and interests, particularly in response
to the development of new media.
These services may be offered in buildings alongside other public services
(Worpole 2005:7).
The literature identifies that both joint-use libraries and, more commonly,
collocation of libraries with other Local Government or State Government
services is an increasing trend both in Australia and overseas. Models of
joint-use libraries and collocation can be distinguished as follows:
ƒ
A joint-use library (e.g. a combined public library and school library) is
defined as libraries where two or more distinct library service providers
serve their client group in the same premises, the governance of which is
cooperatively arranged between the separate authorities.
ƒ
Collocated libraries are defined as multiple services (e.g. a library and
other Council-related services) sharing a building, with separate areas for
each service. These areas need not be physically separated by walls.
Objectives of any multi-function building/site, joint venture or partnership
were identified in People places (Library Council of New South
Wales 2005:35) as being to:
ƒ
provide an integrated and improved level of service, both collectively and
as individual services, than would occur through standalone facilities;
ƒ
meet the individual performance standards required by the governing
bodies and authorities involved; and
ƒ
where possible, provide a more economic use of services and resources.
Collocation, in particular, is seen to have many perceived advantages,
although the potential disadvantages also need to be addressed. Potential
benefits were identified as including:
ƒ
sharing of resources such as staff, space and equipment;
ƒ
encouraging wider public use by providing access to a range of services at
one facility, i.e. the one-stop shop concept;
ƒ
improving the cost effectiveness of the service provided while also
enhancing service quality;
- 62 -
ƒ
reducing duplication of resources and rationalisation of property
portfolios; and
ƒ
providing specialist facilities and services, e.g. specialist expertise in
technology together with equipment (Library Council of New South Wales
2005:35).
Bundy (2003b) noted that joint-use libraries, particularly school/community
libraries, are widespread in Sweden, Canada and in South Australia. They
are less common elsewhere in Australia, and, as evidenced by the Audit,
Victoria (see Table 3.25). The Australian Library and Information Association
(ALIA) (2002) has issued a policy statement that supports the establishment
of joint-use of library functions if they equal or better the level of service
which would be given in separate facilities.
Table 3.25: Collocated or joint-use libraries (Q.16a)
Collocated
Joint-use
Joint-use
Branches*
%
Branches
%
Yes
127
52.3%
24
9.8%
No, freestanding
116
47.7%
220
90.2%
Total
243
100%
244
100%
* One branch did not complete this question
Collocated libraries are much more common in Australia. This is supported
by the results of this Audit (Table 3.25). They typically bring together other
Council-related services such as the Council chambers/offices, community
centres, arts centres, youth facilities, and/or one-stop-shop services. More
recently, collocated libraries have been developed with other government
services such as community health centres, home and community care
centres, employment services, or community technology centres. Collocated
uses overseas vary as widely as police stations, Registry of Births, Deaths
and Marriages, and a marriage suite (Worpole 2005:8).
A concept gaining increasing favour is a library being developed as a key
element in community hubs and learning centres. Libraries Building
Communities (Library Board of Victoria, Report 2, 2005:46) envisages that
communities could build hubs that house a range of services such as library
services, children’s services, medical centres, maternal support groups,
drop-in centres, and other learning and community activities.
Collocation with arts centres, local halls, and the display of local arts and
crafts were also envisaged as an opportunity to provide a more significant
meeting place for the local community. The ‘library centre’ could provide a
café style atmosphere for key groups, and house a community development
worker, thus enabling libraries to focus more on being an effective connector
to other community resources. This is in line with the concept of the library
as an anchor of the community (discussed in Section 1.3.1).
- 63 -
Case study 5: West Footscray Library, Maribyrnong Library Service
Gross floor area:
960 sq m
User catchment:
Specifically West Footscray, Braybrook and Maidstone
suburbs; generally City of Maribyrnong
Cost:
$2.31 million
Architect:
Whitefield McQueen Architects
Date completed:
19 October 2007
Usage:
Library visits have increased by 125%, and new members by
43% in the first six months of operation.
The West Footscray Community Learning Centre is a new facility built on the
site of the former West Footscray Library, originally established in 1974 in a
hall donated by the West Footscray Progress Society. The new centre is a
two-story facility, collocating a library and neighbourhood house, and
incorporating innovative and environmentally sensitive design reflecting the
physical characteristics and heritage of the West Footscray area.
The built form and materials of the centre successfully incorporate the
characteristics of the local area, particularly the identity of Footscray as a
transport and industry hub. The use of decoratively arranged railway
sleepers encircling the lower level and perforated metal encasing the upper
level not only recall the local heritage of rail and shipping industries, but
also serve as natural insulation and light filtering to ensure a comfortable
and environmentally friendly interior. Local artists have also contributed to
the unique design with specially commissioned interior fittings and a
magnificent gateway entrance to the centre.
- 64 -
West Footscray Library continued
Environmentally responsible design has also been addressed through
passive solar design, the use of solar efficient ‘low-e’ glass, and the use of
recycled natural materials to key areas.
Central to the successful implementation and ongoing operation of the West
Footscray Learning Centre has been the strong partnership and cooperation
developed between the library service and the West Footscray
Neighbourhood House.
With the library occupying the ground floor, and the Neighbourhood House
the upper floor of the facility, the Centre has enabled the dove-tailing of
services and the sharing of resources, greatly benefiting users of both
services. Community education programs at the Neighbourhood House are
enhanced by supporting resources and facilities within the library,
particularly extensive IT facilities.
The innovative ‘hot office’ IT section of the library not only provides the
public with internet, but also a range of image editing and desktop
publishing applications, and scanning and printing facilities. The occasional
childcare operated by the Neighbourhood House likewise benefits from the
Library’s children’s services, storytimes, programs and resources. Three
meeting rooms for use by Neighbourhood House and library also greatly
benefit the local community.
- 65 -
3.4.1 Collocation
Libraries were asked whether they were collocated or integrated with other
facilities or services. Table 3.25 shows the results of this question. A
significant 52.3% (127) of libraries said that they were collocated or
integrated with other types of facilities or services. The types of other uses
with which they were collocated are shown in Table 3.26
Table 3.26: Forms of collocation (Q.16b)
Yes
Collocation
Private sector
businesses
(e.g. shops)
Childcare
Branches
13
6
No
%
Branches
Total*
%
Branches
%
10.2%
114
89.8%
127
100%
4.7%
121
95.3%
127
100%
17.3%
105
82.7%
127
100%
Community
centre
22
Youth centre
0
0%
127
100%
127
100%
Community
health centre
6
4.7%
121
95.3%
127
100%
Council onestop-shop
services
42
33.1%
85
66.9%
127
100%
Other Local
Government
service
55
43.3%
72
56.7%
127
100%
State
Government
service
14
11.0%
113
89.0%
127
100%
Federal
Government
service
1
0.8%
126
99.2%
127
100%
Other service
43
84
66.1%
127
100%
33.9%
* Of those 127 branches which are collocated/integrated
The most common type of facility which libraries were collocated with was
Local Government services. Of those that were collocated, one-third (33.1%)
were collocated with a Council one-stop-shop (17.2% of all libraries); 43.3%
(22.5% of all libraries) were collocated with other types of Local Government
services. Hence, in total two-fifths (39.7%) of all libraries were collocated
with other Council uses.
A further 17.3% of those that were collocated (another 9% of all libraries)
were integrated with a community centre, also sometimes a Local
Government function, taking the overall proportion to just on half. None
were collocated with youth centres; another 4.7% of collocated libraries were
integrated with childcare centres (2.5% of all libraries).
- 66 -
Fourteen (11%) collocated libraries were integrated with State Government
services and another 4.7% with community health centres, usually a State
Government function. One library was collocated with a Federal Government
function. Hence, in all, around 60% of libraries were collocated with either
Local, State or Federal Government services.
Thirteen (10.2%) collocated libraries were collocated with private-sector
businesses such as shops; this equated to 5.3% of all libraries.
One-third of collocated libraries (17.6% of all libraries) identified services
other than the above with which they were collocated. These included:
ƒ
Community services or space for community groups (nine libraries).
ƒ
Halls (three), meeting rooms (four), neighbourhood houses (two) or
theatrettes (one).
ƒ
Art galleries (three), exhibition space (one) or museums (two)/local
historical society (three).
ƒ
Schools/school functions (two), a college of advanced education (one),
learning centre/adult education (two).
ƒ
Private-sector businesses, including:
− Professional offices including rooms for health professionals/doctors
(three), and banks or banking facilities (three); and
− Cafes (four).
ƒ
Churches (two).
ƒ
Clubs, such as bowling clubs or RSLs (two), and a Senior Citizens Club.
ƒ
Recreation and sporting functions, such as a recreation centre (one) and
aquatic centre (one).
ƒ
Council Chambers (one) or Town Hall (one).
ƒ
Radio station (one).
Collocated libraries were asked the percentage of the overall complex
dedicated to library functions. More than one-third (34.6%) of collocated
libraries had between 25–49% of the overall complex dedicated to library
functions; the next most frequent category was 23.6% which had 50–74%
dedicated to library functions. Another 17.3% had under 25%. Fewer
proportions had more than 75% of their space dedicated to library functions.
This is shown in Table 3.27.
Table 3.27: Collocated area dedicated to library functions (Q.16c)
Collocation
Branches
%
<25%
22
17.3%
25–49%
44
34.6%
50–74%
30
23.6%
75–89%
16
12.6%
90%>
15
11.8%
Total
127
100%
- 67 -
There is no correlation3 between whether a library is or isn’t collocated and
the number of visitors it attracts each week.
3.4.2 Joint-use
Only 9.8% of Victorian library branches indicated they operated within a
joint-use or multi-use facility, representing 24 branches (Table 3.25).
However, this question may have been misinterpreted by up to 13 branches,
as the arrangements described appeared to be better classified as collocated
rather than joint-use facilities (e.g. Council services, such as customer
service). This report has, however, treated these responses as they have been
self-reported by the branches concerned.
In Victoria, joint-use arrangements currently exist with a number of primary
(three) and secondary (seven) schools, as well as TAFE and CAE users (two).
Other users include art galleries (two), as well as health and welfare services
(two).
3 The correlation coefficient = 0.0268.
- 68 -
Case study 6: Wheelers Hill Library, Monash Public Library Service
Gross floor area:
874 sq m
User catchment:
Wheelers Hill Library services the eastern sector of the
municipality, while the centre attracts visitors from
across Melbourne
Cost:
$1,701,068
Architect:
Cox Sanderson Ness
Date completed:
April 2002
Usage:
Loans: 374,605. Loans have increased from 18,000 per
month in early 2002 to 30,000 per month in mid 2005.
Visits: 148,035. Visits have increased by approx. 3,000
people per month during the same period.
(2005/2006)
The Wheelers Hill Library and Monash Gallery of Art project has been a
significant success for the City of Monash community since opening in 2002.
The complex comprises Wheelers Hill Library, Cafe and Gallery extension,
integrated into a residential estate design plan. The innovative integration of
residential development with public open space, great landscape design and
high quality civic buildings has ensured a harmonious and environmentally
sustainable development for future generations to enjoy.
- 69 -
Wheelers Hill Library continued
Wheelers Hill Library features include an 80-seat meeting room, quiet study
room, junior literacy and multimedia collections, an expanded Chinese
language collection, and the MGA book collection. Artist talks, public
programs and activities support the exhibition program. Cafe @ MGA is a
local cafe and community meeting place; patrons can also bring coffee and a
snack into the library to read and relax. Collocation initiatives have included
library booklists supporting gallery exhibitions, library services storytimes in
the gallery and literary talks themed to exhibitions.
With views over an ornamental pond to the Dandenongs, the library is a
peaceful space for study and a vibrant location for thriving book clubs,
community groups, workshops and literary events.
- 70 -
4. PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT OF BUILDINGS
This section provides a physical assessment of buildings, including user
views on quality; condition and type of building; accessibility and mobility
issues; facilities such as lighting, signage and user comfort; compliance with
Codes and Regulations such as the Building Code of Australia, fire rating,
disability and Occupational health and safety requirements; community
safety; and tenure. It also reviews whether buildings are future proof in
terms of technology, the changing role of libraries in the community, and
environmental sustainability. Finally, it concludes on the basis of the above
whether buildings are, in fact, ‘fit for purpose’.
4.1 Context
A number of challenges are facing library managers and planners in
designing successful libraries for the future. These include:
ƒ
Population and demographic mix changing more rapidly than ever before.
ƒ
Information and Communications Technology (ICT) reconfiguring the
nature of physical space, communications and movement.
ƒ
Education moving out of institutions to inflect the whole of society.
ƒ
Leisure, recreation and personal development increasingly fuse in a more
individualistic culture (CABE & Resource 2003:4)
Essentially, changes in services and functions such as those discussed in
the preceding sections obviously mean changes in design and plan.
‘Traditional library design has to be adapted or superseded’ (Worpole 2005:8)
to meet changing needs for the 21st century.
The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council in the United Kingdom has
undertaken a series of studies in recent years, examining the design
requirements for future libraries. Key design elements include:
ƒ
Establishing the appropriate ethos –reflect the priority services for its
particular set of users.
ƒ
The library as a second home.
ƒ
A window on the world.
ƒ
Time-tabling access and circulation.
ƒ
The library is a public space (and place).
ƒ
Finding a way through the labyrinth.
ƒ
Designing in (and out) technology.
ƒ
Handling conflicting needs and interests.
ƒ
Family-friendly design.
ƒ
Security issues (Worpole 2005:12–15).
New design trends which are emerging include:
ƒ
Modern free style.
ƒ
Open-plan design and circulation.
ƒ
Good disability access.
ƒ
Street level, retail entrances.
- 71 -
ƒ
Contemporary cultural market-place.
ƒ
Each library will develop its own bespoke program and service priorities.
ƒ
Future libraries will be developed in partnership with other services.
ƒ
Adaptability of internal design, circulation, access and hours of services
will be a key factor in building layout and design.
ƒ
Reading development and literacy are likely to become even more central
to what libraries offer communities.
ƒ
Libraries will become key communications centres for mobile
populations.
ƒ
Long stay use of libraries for study purposes requires friendly and
efficient support services such as toilets, catering and recreational quiet
zones.
ƒ
Electronic links between homes and libraries will increase.
ƒ
Children’s services will grow in importance as the library becomes a
secure, electronic safe haven in the city.
ƒ
Virtual library services will be provided 24 hours a day.
ƒ
Librarians will change their role from custodians of culture to knowledge
navigators (CABE & Resource 2003:4–5).
4.2 Respondent views on quality
4.2.1 Survey respondents’ perception of library quality
The link between a library’s community value and its physical design and
layout is well-established in the literature. A library can be busy, but still
underused or difficult to use because of factors such as ‘poor signage, poor
location, poor parking and transport access, unattractive and crowded
buildings, poor disability access, weak and out-of-date resources, poor hours
and poor staffing levels’ (Bundy 2006b:2). CABE and Resource (2003:3)
noted that ‘quality design will have a major role in delivering a twenty-first
century library service; drawing in the diverse communities they serve’.
Research has indicated that the principal reasons for not using libraries are
to do with lifestyle issues. Current public library designs can create barriers,
‘intimidating for some and simply off-putting for others, with dull official
looking facades, imposing issue desks, formal layouts and uncomfortable
furniture’ (CABE & Resource 2003:14).
This was explored by a number of questions in the Audit gauging the survey
respondents’ assessment of:
ƒ
the physical building;
ƒ
the library’s internal layout and design;
ƒ
the overall standard of their library branches (i.e. more than the
building); and
ƒ
the finest and worst attributes of their building.
When interpreting these responses, it is important to keep in mind that the
survey respondents are most likely to be branch librarians, and they have
answered these questions from their perspective; they are neither public
library users nor the library service manager, who has responsibility for
- 72 -
management of the building and strategic decisions about its future.
Accordingly, their views may or may not reflect the views of these other
stakeholder groups. The Audit undertook to measure librarians’ views about
the quality of their buildings as they are daily users of their building and
have a useful qualitative perspective to add to the technical assessment of
quality and standards of provision. A survey of library users would be
impractical for this study.
Figure 4.1: Survey respondents’ perceptions of quality (Q.33a–c)
100%
90%
31.8%
25.5%
24.4%
80%
70%
60%
Excellent
55.1%
50%
55.8%
Unsatisfactory
57.9%
40%
Satisfactory
30%
20%
10%
10.3%
19.3%
19.8%
0%
Overall standard of library
Building
Internal layout and design
Table 4.1: Survey respondents’ perceptions of quality (Q.33a–c)
Rating
standard
Overall
standard of
library
Building
Internal layout
and design
Excellent
31.8%
25.5%
24.4%
Satisfactory
57.9%
55.1%
55.8%
Unsatisfactory
10.3%
19.3%
19.8%
Respondents were asked to rate their perception of the overall standard of
their library branches. This was an assessment of more than the building
fabric, and includes stock, service, satisfaction of user needs, etc. Almost
one-third (31.8%) of respondents rated their branch as being of an excellent
standard overall, more than half (57.9%) gave an overall rating of
satisfactory, and 10.3% rated their overall standard of their library branch
as unsatisfactory (Figure 4.1).
When asked to rate their perception of the quality of their branch’s physical
building, one-quarter (25.4%) of respondents rated the quality of their library
building as excellent, and more than half (54.9%) rated their building as
satisfactory.
- 73 -
Similar results were also received from respondents when asked to rate the
quality of their library’s internal layout and design, with one-quarter (24.2%)
rating it as excellent, just over half (55.3%) as satisfactory, and one-fifth
(19.7%) as unsatisfactory.
Closer examination of these perceptions shows that:
ƒ
Of the 77 libraries that gave their branch an overall rating of excellent,
61% also described the standard of their library building as excellent and
the remaining 39% described it as satisfactory.
ƒ
Twenty-two of the 25 libraries that described the overall standard of their
library branch as unsatisfactory also gave their library building a rating
of unsatisfactory.
This suggests that, as expected, respondents’ views of the quality of the
library building are a key factor in their perception of the overall standard of
their library branch.
Similar findings were also found when respondents’ overall views of library
branch quality were compared to their ratings for the library building’s
internal layout and design:
ƒ
Of the 77 libraries that gave their branch an overall rating of excellent,
65% also described their library’s internal layout and design as excellent
and the remaining 35% described it as satisfactory.
ƒ
Twenty-two of the 25 libraries that described the overall standard of their
library branch as unsatisfactory also described the internal layout and
design of the library as unsatisfactory.
It is apparent that both the physical library building and its internal layout
and design are given similar levels of importance in determining the overall
standard of a library branch.
As identified elsewhere, some public libraries in Victoria are ‘working harder’
than others; this is linked to respondent perception, and is explored in more
detail in the next section.
- 74 -
Case study 7: Wangaratta Library, High Country Library Corporation
Gross floor area:
1,902 sq m (including 180 sq m HCLC Headquarters)
User catchment:
Rural City of Wangaratta (26,959 population) and
Goulburn Ovens Institute of TAFE staff and students,
Wangaratta campus
Cost:
$3,373,083 excl GST
Architect:
John Brand
Date completed:
13 December 2006; opened 5 February 2007
Usage:
Opening hours increased from 47.5 to 51.75 per week
Visits up 38%
Loans up 30%
Internet usage up 38%
The Wangaratta Library is a joint venture between the Rural City of
Wangaratta and Goulburn Ovens Institute of TAFE. High Country Library
Corporation is the partner responsible for providing a seamless service to the
broad community, including TAFE staff and students.
The response to our new library is pure nostalgia, pride and excitement. The
development makes creative and stylish use of the original Wangaratta
Technical School, a heritage building constructed in 1927. A circular drive
means vehicles, including local buses, can stop right at the front door for
easy access.
- 75 -
Wangaratta Library continued
While the facade remains unchanged, the interior is transformed. The
original quadrangle has been enclosed, creating a large, light-filled space
that houses the integrated collections of the Wangaratta Library and
GOTAFE. Clever design has created a unique blend of the historic and
modern, with original classrooms recycled to provide special spaces for
everyone. There are private corners for quiet reading, fully equipped meeting
and seminar rooms, computer labs, exhibition space for artwork, display
areas, and a local history room.
The Gen Y group helped design the Teen Lounge area with its Nintendo
games and chill-out furniture. Adults rarely invade this space, which allows
us to truly engage with an age group notoriously difficult to attract to the
library.
In the opposite corner is the cheerful Kids’ Corner which is separated from
the magazine and coffee area by an artistic glass wall. Parents can still
supervise their children while enjoying a coffee and reading a magazine.
Electronic notice boards, bookshop style shelving and ample face-out display
are simple marketing tools in use throughout the building. The practical
allocation of space allows the library to fully exploit its shared resources,
services and programs in a wonderful, welcoming community hub.
- 76 -
4.2.2 Finest and worst features
Library branch respondents were asked to rank what they perceived to be
the three finest and three worst attributes of their library buildings. Figure
4.2 shows the proportion of libraries that listed each feature as their finest
quality, as well as the proportion of respondents who ranked the item as
being among their library’s three finest attributes.
Figure 4.2: Survey respondents’ perceived finest attributes of library buildings
(Q.33d)
20.0%
Location
Natural light
Layout
10.1%
7.1%
Size/space
13.0%
9.7%
6.5%
6.2%
Ambience
4.5%
5.3%
Modernity
Architectural design
4.3%
4.4%
Heritage elements
1.9%
2.6%
Accessibility
2.6%
6.8%
2.9%
2.2%
Light
Staff
0.9%
1.8%
Community benefit
1.7%
1.8%
Parking
1.9%
1.8%
Excellence in a particular service
1.3%
Collocation
1.3%
Ergonomic ‘shute to shelf’ returns system
0.5%
0.9%
Heating/cooling system
0.9%
Inter-branch borrowing
0.2%
0.4%
External signage
0.5%
0.4%
Not applicable/not known
33.0%
11.8%
12.8%
Among three finest qualities
Finest quality
3.1%
3.4%
2.5%
1.7%
0.4%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
Location was viewed as the best feature of one-third (33%) of Victorian
public libraries, making it the highest ranking positive attribute. It was also
the highest ranked response when the first, second and third finest qualities
were combined, mentioned as a positive feature by one-fifth (20%) of all
library branches. Natural light and layout received the second and third
highest proportion of responses, ranked as the finest feature by 12.8%
(11.8% of all responses) and 10.1% of branches respectively. The order of
these last two items are reversed when the three finest attributes mentioned
by all libraries are taken into consideration, with 13% and 11.8% of
branches listing layout and natural light respectively among their libraries’
three finest features.
The availability of adequate size and space within buildings (7.1% of all
responses), accessibility (6.8% of all responses) and general ambience (6.5%
of all responses) were also highly rated characteristics of public libraries.
- 77 -
Figure 4.3: Survey respondents’ perceived worst attributes of library buildings
(Q.33e)
Size/space
22.5%
Layout
Quality of staff areas/facilities
8.0%
8.1%
Condition of building (age/dated)
10.6%
7.9%
Heating/cooling/ventilation
7.5%
6.5%
Location
7.1%
6.0%
Entrance (e.g. orientation, presence)
5.3%
5.2%
Parking
Collocation
30.5%
10.2%
10.5%
4.4%
4.5%
0.4%
3.9%
Internal assets (e.g. shelving, furniture, signage)
2.2%
Lighting
3.7%
1.8%
3.1%
Disabled access
2.2%
2.7%
1.8%
2.1%
Among three worst qualities
Exterior signage
1.8%
1.9%
Worst quality
External appearance (building/grounds)
1.3%
1.8%
Lack of/limited amenities
Accessibility
1.8%
1.6%
External security (personal)
0.9%
1.5%
External security (building)
0.4%
1.1%
Energy efficiency
0.0%
1.0%
Technology limitations
0.0%
0.8%
Ambience
0.4%
0.5%
Limited opening hours
0.0%
0.3%
Under-utilised
0.0%
0.2%
Need for further staff training
0.0%
0.2%
Not applicable/not known
0.0%
1.3%
2.6%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
Figure 4.3 outlines what respondents perceived to be the worst features of
their library buildings, including the proportion which ranked each item as
the worst feature, as well as the proportion of respondents who perceived the
items as being among their library building’s three worst features.
The worst features tend to reflect the absence of those features valued highly
as positive attributes discussed above. The size of the library building,
including the space within it, is clearly the most common challenge faced by
branches, perceived by almost one-third (30.5%) of respondents to be the
building’s worst feature. It was also ranked as being among the building’s
three worst features by more than one-fifth (22.5%) of respondents, the
highest response overall. After size/space, the condition or age of the
building was ranked by 10.6% of respondents as the worst feature (7.9%
overall). The layout of the building was ranked by 10.2% of respondents as
the worst feature (the third most popular response), rated poor by 10.5%
overall, which interestingly received almost the same proportion of responses
(10.1%) for being the finest attribute. The quality of staff areas received the
third highest number of responses when first, second and third worst
features of library buildings were taken into consideration (8.1% overall).
Other features which rated poorly overall included poor climate control
(6.5%) and poor location (6%).
- 78 -
4.3 Physical condition of public library buildings in Victoria
4.3.1 Age of library buildings
Respondents were asked to indicate the period in which the original building
structure containing the library was built. As can be seen in Table 4.2, the
age of library buildings is diverse, with the largest proportion built in the
period 1960–1979 (33.3%); 7.4% of library buildings were constructed prior
to 1900, while 12.7% were constructed in 2001 or later. Another measure of
age, the number of years in which a library has been in operation in a
building, is discussed in the next section.
Table 4.2: Period of library building construction (Q.19)
Year constructed
<1900
Branches*
%
18
7.4%
1900–1919
6
2.5%
1920–1939
14
5.8%
1940–1959
20
8.2%
1960–1979
81
33.3%
1980–1989
42
17.3%
1990–2000
31
12.7%
2000>
31
12.7%
243
100%
Total
* One branch did not complete this question
4.3.2 Design for purpose
The majority of public libraries in Victoria were purpose built (60.5%); 12.3%
of libraries were located in a heritage building4 (or 30% of non-purpose built
buildings). More than 40% of these heritage buildings which house branch
libraries (12 in total) were constructed prior to the year 1900.
For the 39.5% of libraries not purpose built, respondents were asked to
indicate the year the library was established in the building; the largest
numbers (36%) were converted from their previous use to a library between
1990 and 1999.
Further, many of the more recently established libraries in Victoria have not
been purpose built. Approximately one-quarter (25.1%) of non-purpose built
libraries were established in the past seven years.
Whether the library building is owned by a Council or in private ownership
makes little difference to whether a library building was purpose built
(64.2% and 61.5% respectively).
4 There may have been some confusion with this question, as two library buildings
constructed after 1990 are identified as heritage listed.
- 79 -
Library buildings that are purpose built tend to have a larger gross floor area
than those not originally built to contain a library. More than half (56.3%) of
purpose built libraries had a gross floor area of 500 sq m or more, compared
to approximately one-quarter (27.1%) of non-purpose built libraries.
Conversely, 43.3% of purpose built libraries have a gross floor area of less
than 500 sq m, compared to 72.9% of non-purpose built libraries.
Of those libraries not purpose built, a broad range of previous uses of the
building were identified. As shown in Table 4.3, the conversion of Council
chambers and Council offices were the most common former use of current
library buildings (26%).
The second most common conversion was from commercial and retail spaces
(20%); this included uses such as a bakery, dress shop and several
supermarkets.
Table 4.3: Previous uses of library buildings (Q.21c)
Type of use
Branches
%
Baby health clinic
2
2%
Bank
4
4%
Church
1
1%
Commercial/retail space
20
20%
Commonwealth Employment
Service
1
1%
Community centre/civic centre
1
1%
Community hall
6
6%
Council chambers/Council offices
26
26%
Council storage
1
1%
Court House
2
2%
Factory
4
4%
Meeting rooms
1
1%
Offices
3
3%
Post Office
2
2%
Preschool/primary school
3
3%
Private residence
1
1%
Service station
1
1%
SES building
1
1%
Stationmaster’s house
1
1%
Technical school/Mechanics
Institute
2
2%
- 80 -
Type of use
Undercover car park within
shopping centre
Town Hall
Original purpose unknown
Branches
%
2
2%
10
5
10%
5%
Some buildings identified multiple previous uses, and each has been included. There were 96
branch libraries identified as being non-purpose built (Q21c).
4.3.3 Refurbishment
Respondents were asked about any refurbishments undertaken of branch
library premises. Major refurbishment was defined to include, but not be
restricted to, changes to internal partitions, the size and shape of rooms, as
well as alterations to entry and exits. Major works was defined to exclude
painting or replacement of carpets, but these could be included as a
component of larger works. If the building had received several minor works
over the past five years, which if built together would constitute major
works, the respondent was requested to treat all works as the one
refurbishment. The number of years over which the works were undertaken
was also indicated.
In total, more than one-third of Victorian library branches (39.3%,
representing 96 libraries) indicated they had not received any refurbishment
since being built. A further 12 libraries (4.9%) did not know whether they
had been refurbished or not; included within these 12 libraries are a large
number constructed more recently, which are less likely to need
refurbishing.
These figures do not necessarily indicate that refurbishment is required, but
it is considered to be more likely. The perceived need for future
refurbishment within the next five years is identified in Table 4.4.
Overall, more than two-thirds of respondents (73.9%) indicated that such
works were not required over the next five-years to their branch library. It is
noted that the condition of the library building was the second highest
response (10.6%) for what was perceived to be the worst features of
individual library branch buildings (Section 4.2.2), and the fourth highest
response (7.9%) when all ‘worst’ responses are combined. These results
suggest that although the aged or dated nature of the building is not
perceived to be the most negative feature of the building, it is still viewed as
one of the most common features which presently detracts from the library
building as a whole.
Further details on planned refurbishments are discussed in Section 7 of this
report.
- 81 -
Table 4.4: Requirement for major refurbishment/extension in next five years
(Q.43a)
Requirement for
major
refurbishment
Overall
Branches*
%
Yes
60
26.1%
No
170
73.9%
Total
230
100%
* 14 branches did not complete this question
A total of 136 library buildings, representing 58.6% of all branches, have
undergone major refurbishment. Of these, approximately two-thirds (63.9%)
of the most recent refurbishments had taken place in the past seven years
(Table 4.5). Detailed analysis of the year of the most recent refurbishment
compared to the year that the library building was originally constructed
revealed the relatively slow progress of refurbishment, even on older
buildings (Table 4.5).
Table 4.5: Most recent major refurbishment by age (year built) of library (Q.19)
Year library
building
constructed
Most recent major library refurbishment
1970–
1979
1980–
1989
1990–
1999
2000–
2004
2005>
Not
known
Total
<1900
1
1
2
6
1
1
12
1900–1919
0
0
0
1
2
0
3
1920–1939
1
1
5
0
5
2
14
1940–1959
0
0
5
3
4
0
12
1960–1979
0
1
17
26
14
1
59
1980–1989
0
2
7
7
4
0
20
1990–2000
0
0
1
5
2
0
8
2000>
0
0
0
3
4
1
8
Total
2
5
37
51
36
5
136
Overall, at least $56.8 million was spent on the last major refurbishment
undertaken of all public library buildings in Victoria. However, the actual
cost is likely to be significantly higher, as 27 branches, or 19.9% of
refurbished branches, did not indicate the cost of their refurbishments. It is
also noted that these costs do not account for changes in the Consumer
Price Index (CPI) between the years measured. Acknowledging these
limitations, the average cost of library refurbishment was approximately
$520,000.
- 82 -
However, this average is skewed by a number of large refurbishments. More
than half (55.5%) of library branches whose buildings had been refurbished
indicated that the total cost of refurbishments was less than $500,000
(Table 4.6); 14% of libraries estimated the total cost of refurbishments to be
$1 million dollars or more.
Table 4.6: Cost of most recent major refurbishment (Q.22a)
Cost of most recent
major refurbishment
Branches
%
<$50,000
20
14.7%
$50,000–$99,999
11
8.1%
$100,000–$249,000
26
19.1%
$250,000–$499,999
19
14.0%
$500,000–$999,000
15
11.0%
$1,000,000–$1,999,999
13
9.6%
6
4.4%
110
100%
$2,000,000>
Total*
* 26 refurbished branches did not complete question. Cost provided to nearest $100,000.
It is evident from Figure 4.4 that libraries undertake a wide range of works
as part of major refurbishments. The most common types of refurbishment
works undertaken in Victorian libraries were internal reorganisation of space
and painting (both 77.4% of refurbished libraries), followed by carpeting or
other floor covering as part of major works (73.7%), and internal structural
alterations (68.6%). Interestingly, 4.4% of refurbished libraries stated that
refurbishment involved a decrease in floorspace.
Other works undertaken (by 25 libraries) involved environmental
sustainability improvements, the construction of new external doors,
windows and rooves, landscaping, and the development of collocated
facilities (such as a Customer Service Centre). In a few cases, a complete
rebuild of the library at the same site was undertaken.
- 83 -
Figure 4.4: Type of work undertaken at last major refurbishment (Q.22b)
Painting
Internal reorganisation of space
Carpeting or other floor covering
Internal structure alterations
Improved collection areas
Improved shelving
Improved resource areas
Improved reading and study areas
Improved disabled access
Improved computer access
Improved staff areas
Air conditioning
Additional floorspace
Heating
Improved amenities areas
Fire safety improvements
Building materials – external cladding
Building services upgrade
Energy consumption improvements
Improvements to other functional areas
Decreased floorspace
Wireless internet
Other works
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
4.4 Flexible and multifunctional buildings
Library buildings need to provide different types of spaces to meet the
diverse needs of a variety of different users. As noted in People places
(Library Council of New South Wales 2000:50), ‘Design, layout and service
requirements change so rapidly that flexibility must be designed and built
into a new building’. These spaces also need to be designed so that they are
separate, yet do so without segregating or causing ‘no go zones’ e.g. children
only in children’s spaces (Cox 2000).
However, just under half of branch libraries (110 or 45.2%) contain specialist
multi-purpose areas (Table 3.24, Q.14e). Only 37 libraries (15.2%, Q.15)
stated they had the ability to subdivide multi-purpose areas within their
building, such as through the use of wall partitions. A further 56 libraries
(23%, Q15) stated they had no space which could be considered as multipurpose.
Less than one-quarter (23.4%) of branch libraries (57 in total) indicated they
possessed the ability to adapt existing spaces within their building for new
uses, as an alternative to major alterations.
- 84 -
The existence of joint-use and collocated libraries in Victoria is discussed in
Section 3.4.
4.5 Internal accessibility and mobility
Accessibility is an important aspect of any public facility. As noted in People
places (Library Council of New South Wales 2005:51), ‘a library must be
open and accessible to the whole community. This means designing a
building that promotes equality for young and old, people with prams and
people with a disability’.
In addition to meeting the disability access requirements, ‘the best library
buildings also provide for other dimensions of access including
psychological, sensory, financial as well as provision for socially excluded
groups such as ethnic minorities and the mentally disabled’ (Bryson et al
2003:9). Such broad measures could not easily be measured through the
Audit.
A series of questions were asked throughout the Audit to ascertain the
current level of internal accessibility of Victorian public library buildings.
External accessibility to the building is discussed in Section 5.3.
Access Audits are formal assessments used to determine whether a building
meets the design requirements specific to the needs of people with a
disability, as outlined in the Australian Standards Design for Access and
Mobility (AS 1428) (Standards Australia 2003) and the Building Code of
Australia (BCA). Almost two-thirds (63.4%) of branches indicated they had
undertaken an access audit of their library building, approximately onequarter (27.6%) indicated one had not been undertaken, and a further 9.1%
were not aware of whether such an audit had been undertaken.
The majority of these access audits had been undertaken recently. Of those
libraries that had undertaken an access audit, more than one-third (36.1%)
had been carried out during 2006/07. Just 7.1% had completed their last
audit prior to the year 2000 (Table 4.7). A notable proportion of branches
could not identify which year an audit had been undertaken, despite being
sure that one had been completed. This suggests that the outcomes of audits
are not widely publicised for action.
Table 4.7: Year access audit undertaken (Q.25b)
Period
Branches
<2000
11
7.1%
2000–2002
16
10.3%
2003–2005
52
33.5%
2006
45
29.0%
2007
11
7.1%
Year not provided
20
12.9%
155
100%
Total
%
- 85 -
Additionally, libraries were asked their opinion of whether their building
complied with the accessibility requirements outlined in AS1428 and BCA.
Two-thirds of library branches (66% or 161 branches) indicated they
complied with these standards, while 12.7% did not comply. One-fifth
(50 branches or 20.5%) did not know if their library buildings met the
standards. Surprisingly, given the number of heritage buildings identified in
Section 4.3.1), just one library stated there was no requirement for their
branch to comply.
However, 39 of the 121 libraries (24.2%) that indicated they complied with
the AS1428 and BCA access and mobility standards also stated that a
formal access audit had not been undertaken. These libraries have
responded based on their practical knowledge of the library’s operation.
Of the 31 libraries that indicated they did not meet access and mobility
standards, only eight indicated that the situation was to be improved by
planned refurbishments. Four of these indicated this would be achieved by
their library relocating to another site, while the other four indicated
improved disabled access was among planned refurbishments of the existing
library building. Interestingly, these non-complying libraries which planned
to be refurbished represented only 20% of all of the libraries that indicated
their branches had planned to improve disabled access during future
refurbishments. The remainder of those libraries undertaking such
improvements include those that already comply (55%), or where compliance
status was unknown (25%). This may suggest that, while some libraries
achieve minimum standards, they seek to improve the inclusiveness of their
facilities. This is confirmed by further analysis of the accessibility of different
areas of library buildings and their immediate vicinities, which indicates that
some libraries that indicated they comply with the BCA and AS1428 are
lacking in some key facets. This is outlined further below.
Branches were also asked a series of questions to determine which areas of
their library buildings were accessible to people who use mobility or adaptive
equipment.
4.5.1 Wheelchair-accessible car parking
Close to one-third (31.1%) of branch libraries did not have wheelchairaccessible car parking near their main entrance (Table 4.8).
Just over one-quarter (28%) of libraries that stated they were accessible to
people in wheelchairs do not have wheelchair-accessible parking nearby.
Almost half (45.2%) of nearby wheelchair-accessible parking supplied only
one car space. Approximately the same proportion (43.5%) provided two to
four spaces. Two libraries had access to 10 or more accessible spaces.
Table 4.8: Accessible parking nearby (Q.25e)
Accessible car parks
Branches
%
1
76
31.1%
2–4
73
29.9%
5–9
8
3.3%
10>
2
0.8%
- 86 -
Accessible car parks
Branches
All accessible parking
168
68.9%
No accessible parking
76
31.1%
244
100%
Total
%
* 9 branches did not complete this question
4.5.2 Wheelchair-accessible main entrances
Nineteen libraries (7.8% of all branches) did not have a main entrance that
was wheelchair accessible. However, eight of these libraries (42.1%) stated
they complied with the relevant access standards. Therefore, 5% of all
libraries that indicated their library building complied with BCA and AS
requirements do not have wheelchair accessible main entrances. Please note:
information was not requested regarding whether an alternative entrance
was available.
Ninety-eight percent of the 50 libraries that did not know whether they
complied with the relevant access standards had wheelchair-accessible main
entrances.
4.5.3 Wheelchair-accessible levels
Seven of the 37 libraries (18.9%) that are located over more than one level
indicated that not all levels are wheelchair accessible. Four of these seven
libraries (57.1%) indicated they still complied with accessibility standards.
Only one of the nine library branches that are not at least partly located on
the ground floor has a lift.
4.5.4 Wheelchair-accessible aisles
The aisle space in 39 libraries (16%) is not wheelchair accessible. However,
17 of these libraries (43.6%) indicated their building was accessibility and
mobility compliant. Therefore, 10.6% of all libraries that stated they
complied with the relevant access standards do not have aisles with
sufficient space for wheelchair access.
More than one-quarter (28.2%) of the libraries that did not know whether
they met the necessary standards (11 libraries) did not have wheelchair
accessible aisles.
4.5.5 Wheelchair-accessible toilets
More than one-quarter (27.6%) of library buildings, representing 67 libraries
in total, do not have a wheelchair accessible toilet.
Twenty-nine of the 161 libraries that stated they complied with both the BCA
and AS requirements (18%) did not contain a wheelchair accessible toilet.
Eighteen of the 50 libraries that did not know if they complied with
accessibility standards (26.9%) did not have a wheelchair accessible toilet.
- 87 -
4.5.6 Building characteristics connected to compliance
Based on further analysis of results, the following can be observed about the
compliance of Victorian library buildings with the relevant access standards:
ƒ
Compliance is related to intensity of use. Libraries that operated fewer
hours per week tended to have lower levels of compliance with access and
mobility standards than those libraries that operated longer hours. Only
33% of libraries that operated less than 15 hours per week indicated
compliance, compared to 66.3% for libraries open 15–59 hours per week
and 89.3% for those open 60 or more hours per week.
ƒ
In general, those libraries that had a higher number of visitors each week
also had a higher rate of accessibility compliance than those libraries
with fewer visitors. Libraries that had less than 500 visitors per week had
a compliance rate of 56.4%, lower than those libraries with 500–4,999
visitors per week (which averaged a 66.7% compliance rate), and libraries
with 5,000 or more visitors per week (84.6%).
ƒ
Libraries with a larger gross floorspace tended to have notably better
accessibility than smaller libraries. Libraries that were less than
150 sq m had a 37.1% compliance rate, lower than libraries that were
150–999 sq m and 1,000 sq m or more, which had compliance rates of
66.4% and 85.4% respectively. However, it is noted that one of the five
libraries with a GFA of 2,000 sq m or more did not comply with
accessibility standards.
ƒ
Compliance appears related to public ownership. Council-owned library
buildings had a higher proportion of access and mobility standards
compliance than privately owned library buildings (68.3% versus 50.0%).
ƒ
Compliance is generally related to building age. Nine of the 18 library
buildings constructed prior 1900 conformed with accessibility standards
(50%), while 30 of the 31 library buildings constructed after the year
2000 complied (96.8%). However, overall the age of library buildings was
not always indicative of their compliance with access and mobility
standards. For example, 71.6% of the library buildings constructed
between 1960–1979 complied, whereas only 47.6% built from 1980–1989
complied.
ƒ
Purpose built library buildings had slightly higher rates of accessibility
compliance than those not purpose built (69.9% versus 61.5%). However,
non-purpose built libraries had a notably higher proportion of noncompliance compared with those that were purpose built (18.8%
compared to 8.9%).
ƒ
Compliance during refurbishments was not a priority until recently as
legislative changes took affect. Interestingly, library buildings that had
undergone some form of refurbishment had the same reported level of
access and mobility compliance as library buildings that had not been
refurbished (both 68.4%). Library buildings refurbished between 1970–
1999 actually had a lower compliance rate (59.5%) than un-refurbished
libraries. Libraries refurbished from 2000–2004 and 2005 onwards had
compliance rates of 70.6% and 83.3% respectively.
ƒ
Of those respondents that gave their library building a rating of excellent,
83.9% indicated their library buildings complied with access and mobility
standards, 3.2% did not comply, and 12.9% did not know. However, less
- 88 -
than one-third (32.3%) of library branches that complied with these
standards rated the overall quality of their library as excellent.
As seen from the results presented above, there are still a notable proportion
of library branches in Victoria that contain one or more areas of the building
which are not accessible to people in a wheelchair. This has important
ramifications for both patrons and the employment of people with a physical
disability in Victorian public libraries.
4.6 Lighting
People places tells us that the quality and appropriate level of lighting in a
public library has an impact on both the functionality, as well as the
ambience of the library (Library Council of New South Wales 2005:56). Good
quality lighting is essential for the health, safety and wellbeing of library
staff. It is also necessary to create a visual environment in which hazards are
visible, and adverse factors such as glare and reflections are excluded or
minimised.
Natural light and ambience were rated as some of the best characteristics of
public libraries (Section 4.2.2). Natural light received the second highest
proportion of responses for the finest characteristic (11.8% of all responses)
and general ambience was also highly rated (6.5% of all responses). On the
other hand, a lack of natural light was not mentioned by any libraries as
being among the three worst features of their building. However, lighting in
general (primarily artificial) was identified by 1.8% of respondents as being
their library building’s worst feature and by 3.1% when the three worst
features are combined, making it the equal eleventh most common response
in both categories.
Libraries were asked to rate the level of lighting in their building. In
formulating their response, libraries were advised that a ‘Satisfactory’
response would indicate, for example, that lighting illuminates all shelf areas
evenly, with no variations of light and dark areas. A ‘Poor’ response would
indicate, for example, that you cannot read the Dewey Decimal Classification
codes on all books. Standards in lighting are covered under Australian
Standard 1680.
As shown by Table 4.9, almost nine out of 10 branches (88.5%) described
the level of lighting within the library as either satisfactory or excellent.
Table 4.9: Survey respondents’ rating of level of lighting in library buildings
(Q.26)
Rating
Excellent
Branches*
%
78
32.1%
137
56.4%
Poor
28
11.5%
Total
243
100%
Satisfactory
* One branch did not complete this question
Libraries were afforded the opportunity to make additional comments
regarding their building’s lighting. Many comments related to the
identification of specific locations within a building where lighting was
- 89 -
considered to be poor or inconsistent. A number noted that lighting
improvements were a key consideration of their recent refurbishments. For
some buildings, it was not a consideration during the original design. Some
libraries plan to improve their existing lighting to make it environmentally
sustainable.
Figure 4.5: Survey respondents’ satisfaction with lighting and signage (Q.26,
Q.27a–b)
100%
14.0%
90%
14.4%
32.1%
80%
70%
52.7%
60%
Excellent
63.4%
50%
Satisfactory
56.4%
40%
Poor
30%
20%
33.3%
10%
22.2%
11.5%
0%
Lighting
External signage
Internal signage
4.7 Signage
Library signage, both internal and external to the library building, is an
important aspect of libraries, particularly for larger ones (Library Council of
New South Wales 2005:61).
Respondents’ perceptions relating to both the internal and external signage
in Victorian libraries are outlined in the sections below and summarised in
Table 4.10.
Table 4.10: Survey respondents’ rating of public information signage (Q.27a–b)
External
Rating
Excellent
Branches*
Internal
%
Branches*
%
34
14.0%
35
14.4%
128
52.7%
154
63.4%
Poor
81
33.3%
54
22.2%
Total
243
100%
243
100%
Satisfactory
* One branch did not complete this question
- 90 -
4.7.1 External signage
Libraries were asked to rate their branch’s external public information
signage, which includes directional signs (indicating the library’s location
from neighbouring streets), as well as identification on the building exterior
near the entrance. Two-thirds (66.7%) of respondents rated their library’s
external signage as either satisfactory or excellent, while one-third (33.3%)
rated it as poor (Table 4.10).
Libraries were also invited to make additional comments relating to their
external signage. From those comments, common reasons for a rating their
external signage as poor included:
ƒ
A lack of directional signage from nearby streets and roads.
ƒ
The location of libraries within a shopping centre not being clearly
identified within the centre.
ƒ
Identification signage on the exterior of the library building not
prominent, either from being placed in a poor position, or being obscured
by objects such as a verandah or foliage.
ƒ
The hours of library operation not being clearly displayed, or not
displayed at all.
ƒ
The difficulty in obtaining signage both on the building and in
surrounding streets due to the library’s location in a heritage area.
ƒ
No, or only temporary (such as a sandwich board), external signs on the
building to identify it as a library.
Seven of those libraries that rated their external signage as poor indicated
that there was an intention to implement or update external signage soon.
External signage was also cited by a few libraries as one of their best (three
libraries) and worst (12 libraries) features (Section 4.2.2).
4.7.2 Internal signage
Internal public information signage within a library building should provide
basic directional information to library users. Respondents completing the
survey were advised that a rating of ‘Satisfactory’ indicates that their
internal signage complies with AS 2899 (withdrawn) requirements, while a
rating of ‘Poor’ indicates that numerous requests are received for assistance
in physically locating information.
More than three-quarters of respondents (77.4%) described the internal
signage within their library branch as either satisfactory or excellent. This is
a higher proportion than ratings for external signage (65.4%) (Table 4.10).
Libraries were invited to make additional comments relating to their internal
signage. The vast majority of libraries, that gave a rating of poor and
provided additional comments, indicated that new or improved internal
signage was either planned, or was currently being undertaken. Others
noted that signage was satisfactory in terms of identification; however, their
appearance was dated or unprofessional.
Internal signage was identified as a finest feature by one library, and as a
worst feature by 18 libraries.
- 91 -
Case study 8: Goroke Library, Wimmera Regional Library Corporation
Gross floor area:
35 sq m
User catchment:
Between 300-400, township and surrounds of Goroke
Cost:
$48,552.60
Date completed:
March 2007
The Goroke Library renovation took a former retail building and turned it
into a light, bright and friendly multi-purpose space for a small community.
Through the use of limited funds, the library has increased its visibility and
public profile and is recognised as a welcoming space for the Goroke
community to use.
The library has expanded the collection to better suit community needs and
now includes a separate public access internet PC, a community meeting
space, and relaxing lounge chairs. These new features, as well as airconditioning – essential in the hot summers – have helped encourage library
visitors to stay longer and visit more often.
The staff are very happy with the larger space which has more than
quadrupled and the community appreciates the natural light and welcoming
atmosphere.
- 92 -
4.8 Patron comfort
People places identifies the importance of controlling the internal climate of
libraries for both the comfort of users, as well as maintaining ‘optimum
temperature and humidity levels for the material collection’ (Library Council
of New South Wales 2005:57).
The heating, cooling and ventilation system was identified by a small
number of respondents (2.5%) as being among their branch’s three finest
features, the twelfth most common response. On the other hand, heating,
cooling and ventilation system also received the fourth highest number of
responses (7.5%) when library branches indicated what they perceived to be
the worst feature of their library building, and fifth highest (6.5%) when the
worst three features were combined.
While the internal climate and its impact on user comfort is not considered
by libraries to be the most important aspect of their branch, it still received a
notable number of responses identifying it as one aspect which detracts from
the quality of the library branch building.
4.9 Compliance with codes and regulations
A series of questions were asked to ascertain compliance with various
building design codes and regulations. This included an indication of
whether a formal audit of compliance had been undertaken. These were:
ƒ
Building Code of Australia, including AS 1428.1, 1428.2, 1428.3 and
1428.4.
ƒ
Fire codes.
ƒ
Disability access, AS 1428 Design for access and mobility.
ƒ
Occupational health and safety.
Table 4.11 reports the proportion of libraries that have undertaken each of
these audits.
The validity of any analysis is limited by the low level of knowledge about the
various audits and their results, ranging from 10.7% for the BCA audit to
22.6 for the OH&S audit. One conclusion which can be drawn is that library
staff are not involved in, or informed of, the undertaking of these audit or
their results.
- 93 -
Table 4.11: Compliance with relevant building codes and regulations (Q.25)
Building Code of
Australia (BCA)
Branches*
%
Fire Rating
Assessments
Branches*
Yes
137
56.4%
183
No
80
32.9%
7
Don't know
26
10.7%
Haven't
undertaken
assessment
0
Not required
Total
Access and
Mobility Standards
%
75.3%
Branches*
%
OH&S Standards
Branches*
161
66.3%
165
2.9%
31
12.7%
6
18
7.4%
50
20.6%
55
22.6%
0.0%
35
14.4%
0
0.0%
17
7.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
0.4%
0
0.0%
243
100%
243
100%
243
100%
243
100%
* One branch did not complete this question
Figure 4.6: Compliance with relevant building codes and regulations (Q.25)
165
161
Yes
183
137
6
31
No
7
OH&S Standards
80
Access and Mobility Standards
Fire Rating Assessments
55
50
Don't know
Building Code of Australia (BCA)
18
26
0
%
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
The level of compliance with fire rating assessments, disability access and
occupational health and safety standards is summarised in Figure 4.6. Each
of the audits and respective level of compliance with each are discussed in
the following sections.
- 94 -
67.9%
2.5%
Figure 4.7: Compliance with relevant codes and regulations by building age
(Q.25)*(Q.19)
1900–1919
1920–1939 1940–1959
1960–1979
1980–1989 1999–2000
2000>
OH&S
19.4%
80.6%
Fire
100.0%
Access
3.2%
96.8%
OH&S
23.3%
76.7%
Fire
70.0%
Access
70.0%
OH&S
30.0%
40.5%
2.4%
57.1%
Fire
33.3%
4.8%
61.9%
Access
26.7%
3.3%
35.7%
16.7%
47.6%
OH&S
Fire
24.7%
3.7%
71.6%
16.0%
84.0%
Access
OH&S
40.0%
60.0%
Fire
40.0%
5.0%
55.0%
Access
35.0%
15.0%
50.0%
OH&S
35.7%
7.1%
57.1%
OH&S
28.6%
7.1%
64.3%
Access
21.4%
7.1%
71.4%
Fire
12.3%
16.0%
71.6%
50.0%
50.0%
Fire
83.3%
16.7%
Access
83.3%
16.7%
<1900
OH&S
Fire
Access
0%
10%
20%
22.2%
27.8%
50.0%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Yes
80%
No
90%
100%
Don't know/not done
4.9.1 Building Code of Australia
A total of 56.1% of libraries indicated that a building audit had been
undertaken to identify compliance with the Building Code of Australia (BCA),
including AS 1428.1–1428.4 (Table 4.11). Almost one-third (32.9%) indicated
that an audit had not been undertaken. A further 10.7% of respondents did
not know whether a building audit had been undertaken.
The majority of audits have been prepared in the past few years; 92.7% of
those that knew the year of the audit had been undertaken from 2003
onwards. A small proportion (7.2% of known audits were prior to 2003) of
audits are quite dated, and buildings may no longer comply with any
standards altered or brought into affect in the past five years.
Table 4.12: Year Building Code of Australia compliance audit undertaken (Q.23)
Year
Year not provided
Branches
26
%
19.0%
<2000
5
3.6%
2000–2002
3
2.2%
- 95 -
Year
Branches
%
2003–2005
54
39.4%
2006
24
17.5%
2007
25
18.2%
Total
137
100%
4.9.2 Fire rating
Three-quarters (75.3%) of libraries identified their buildings complied with
fire rating assessments (Table 4.11). Seven libraries (2.9%) indicated they did
not comply. In addition 18 libraries (7.8% of all branches) did not know
whether their library building complied, and a further 35 (14.4%) stated they
had not undertaken an assessment.
However, responses to a number of other questions in the audit cloud this
finding. Libraries were also asked questions (e.g. Q.30) which asked for
further detail on their building’s fire safety mechanisms. These are detailed
below:
Fire exits
Fifteen (6.2% of all libraries) considered that they did not have a clearly
marked fire exit. However, six of these libraries stated they complied with a
fire rating assessment.
Six out of the 35 libraries (17.1%) that had not undertaken a fire rating
assessment did not have clearly marked fire exits.
Fire extinguishers
Nine (3.7%) libraries did not have fire extinguishers available within their
library branches.
Six out of the nine libraries without fire extinguishers stated they complied
with fire safety assessments.
Fire alarms
Just over one-half of libraries have fire alarms (56.4% or 137 branches). The
reason for such a low proportion is unknown. Some caution must be taken
in interpreting this finding. It is noted that almost two-thirds (64.2%) of
libraries that indicated they did not have a fire alarm indicated they
complied with fire rating assessments. It is possible that, for at least some of
the libraries which indicated they did not have these or a number of other
facilities, the negative response may have been due to the fire alarm systems
being part of the whole building and not specifically for the library. It is also
possible there may have been some misinterpretation of the term ‘fire alarm’
rather than ‘smoke alarm’ or ‘smoke detector’. However, if true, it is of
concern.
Sprinkler systems
Just one-fifth (20.6%) of libraries indicated that a fire sprinkler system was
installed within their building.
- 96 -
Building characteristics connected to fire safety
Based on further analysis of results, the following can be observed about the
compliance of Victorian public library buildings with fire safety
requirements:
ƒ
There was a lower degree of fire rating compliance among library
branches that operated for fewer hours each week; that is, 66.7% of
libraries that operated for 1–15 hours per week complied with fire rating
assessments compared to 74.2% of those operating for 15–59 hours and
92.9% of those operating 60 or more hours per week.
ƒ
Those libraries which had a higher number of visitors each week
generally had a higher rate of fire safety compliance than those with
fewer visitors. For example, libraries that received fewer than 1,000
visitors per week had a compliance level of 70.5%, while libraries with
5,000 or more visitors per week had an 88.5% compliance level.
ƒ
Larger libraries tended to have better fire safety compliance than smaller
libraries. Libraries less than 150 sq m had a 57.1% compliance rate,
lower than libraries that were 150–999 sq m and 1,000 sq m or more,
which had compliance rates of 73.8% and 89% respectively. The five
libraries that were 2,000 sq m or more all indicated they complied with
fire rating assessments.
ƒ
Council-owned library buildings had a higher proportion of fire rating
assessment compliance than privately owned library buildings (77.2%
versus 65.4%); 3.5% of Council-owned library buildings did not comply,
but no privately owned libraries fell into this category. However, a higher
proportion of library branches located within privately owned buildings
had not undertaken an assessment (26.9%) compared to Council-owned
library buildings (11.9%).
ƒ
Eleven (61.1%) of the 18 library buildings constructed prior to the year
1900 conformed with safety rating assessments, while all of the 31
library buildings constructed after the year 2000 complied. However,
overall the age of library buildings was not always indicative of their
compliance with fire rating assessments. For example, 84% (or 68) of the
81 library buildings constructed between 1960–1979 complied, whereas
only 67.7% (or 21) of the 31 that were built from 1990–2000 complied.
ƒ
Purpose built library buildings had a slightly higher than average fire
safety compliance (77.4% as opposed to the average of 75%). Nonpurpose built library buildings had compliance levels slightly below the
average (71.9%).
ƒ
Although the most recently refurbished (2005 or later) library buildings
had a compliance rate of 91.7%, the date of refurbishment, or any form of
refurbishment, was not always indicative of compliance. Seventy-five of
the 96 (78.1%) un-refurbished library buildings complied with fire rating
assessments, compared to 69 of the 93 (74.2%) library buildings that had
undergone major refurbishment between 1980 and 2004.
- 97 -
ƒ
Of those libraries that rated their building as excellent, 87% complied
with fire ratings, while the remaining 13% either had not undertaken
such an assessment or did not know if one had been undertaken.
However, less than one-third (29.5%) of library branches that complied
with fire safety standards rated the overall quality of their building as
excellent, indicating compliance is not a factor which influences survey
respondents’ perceptions.
Of those seven libraries that indicated they did not comply with fire ratings,
only two indicated improvements were planned. One of these indicated their
library was to be relocated to another site, while the other indicated
improvements to fire safety were among planned refurbishments. A number
of libraries which planned to improve fire safety during future
refurbishments already comply with fire rating (81.3%).
4.9.3 Disability access
Library compliance with access and mobility standards is discussed in
Section 4.5, where it was noted two-thirds of library branches (66% or 161
branches) indicated they complied with the accessibility requirements
outlined in AS1428 and the BCA, while 12.7% did not comply. The following
observations were also made:
ƒ
Nineteen (7.8%) library main entrances are not wheelchair accessible;
however, an alternative entrance may be available.
ƒ
Of those libraries that contained more than one level, one-fifth (20.6%)
indicated not all levels were wheelchair accessible.
ƒ
Close to one-third (31%) of branch libraries did not have wheelchairaccessible parking near their main entrance.
ƒ
Thirty-nine (16%) indicated that library aisles could not be accessed by a
wheelchair.
ƒ
More than one-quarter (27.6%) did not have a wheelchair-accessible toilet
in the library building.
Compliance with accessibility standards has been analysed by the age of the
building. As expected, most new buildings (86.8% since the year 2000)
complied with requirements; compliance generally declined with building
age. However, the rate of compliance of buildings constructed between 1980–
1989 (47.6%) was notably lower than the decades preceding and following.
4.9.4 Occupational health and safety
Two-thirds (67.9%) of libraries indicated that they had undertaken an
Occupational health and safety (OH&S) audit. A small proportion (7%)
indicated no such audit had been undertaken, and one-quarter (22.6%) did
not know. Of those libraries that had undertaken an audit, all had been
done in the past seven years, with almost four out of five (79.7%) done in
2006/07.
- 98 -
Table 4.13: Year Occupational Health and Safety audit undertaken (Q.32b)
Year
Branches
%
Year not provided
3
1.8%
2000–2002
2
1.2%
2003–2005
28
17.2%
2006
62
38.0%
2007
68
41.7%
Total*
163
100%
* 16 branches (6.6% of all branches) haven’t undertaken an OH&S audit and 65 branches
(26.6% of all branches) don’t know if they have undertaken an OH&S audit.
Additionally, libraries were asked whether they complied with OH&S
requirements. Two-thirds of libraries indicated they complied (67.6%);
slightly more libraries indicated their compliance than had undertaken an
audit. A small proportion of branches (2.2%) indicated their building did not
comply with these standards, while approximately one-fifth (22.5%) did not
know.
Of the six libraries that indicated they did not meet OH&S standards, only
one indicated the situation was to be improved, such as through
refurbishment of the existing building.
Based on further analysis of results, the following can be observed about
compliance of Victorian library buildings with occupational health and safety
standards:
ƒ
Libraries that operated fewer hours per week tended to report lower levels
of compliance with OH&S standards. Less than one-half (44.4%) of
libraries that operated less than 15 hours per week indicated compliance,
compared to 68.4% for libraries that were open 15–59 hours per week,
and 82.1% for those open 60 or more hours per week.
ƒ
In general, those libraries with a higher number of visitors each week
tended to have a higher rate of compliance with OH&S standards.
Libraries with less than 500 visitors per week had a compliance rate of
56.4%, lower than those libraries with 500–4,999 visitors per week
(which averaged a 69.8% compliance rate), and libraries with 5,000 or
more visitors per week (84.6%).
ƒ
Larger libraries tended to have a higher rate of OH&S compliance.
Libraries less than 150 sq m had a 42.9% compliance rate, lower than
libraries between 50–999 sq m and those 1,000 sq m or more, which had
compliance rates of 64.4% and 90.9% respectively.
ƒ
Council-owned library buildings reported a higher rate of OH&S
compliance than privately owned buildings (71.3% versus 53.8%).
However, the difference was most likely due to a significantly higher
proportion of ‘don’t know’ responses among private owners (38.5%)
compared to respondents of Council–owned (19.8%) library buildings. The
reason for this result is not clear, as there should be no relationship
between ownership and OH&S compliance.
- 99 -
ƒ
Ten of the 18 library buildings constructed prior to the year 1900
conformed to OH&S standards (55.6%), while 25 of the 31 library
buildings constructed after the year 2000 complied (80.6%). Overall, the
age of library buildings was not always indicative of compliance, which
may be due to the mixed ranges of ‘don’t know’ responses for each period.
However, older buildings tended to have a higher non-compliance rate.
ƒ
Purpose-built library buildings had higher rates of OH&S compliance
(71.9% versus 62.5%). However, both purpose and non-purpose built
buildings had a similar proportion of non-complying buildings (2.1% and
3.1% respectively). Again, the difference in compliance is attributable to
the proportion of ‘don’t know’ responses (18.5% purpose built compared
to 28.1% non-purpose built).
ƒ
Libraries that had undergone some form of refurbishment had the same
level of OH&S compliance as library buildings that had not been
refurbished (both 69%). Refurbished libraries had a slightly lower level of
non compliance (2.2%) compared to those that were un-refurbished
(3.2%).
ƒ
Of those libraries that gave their library building’s safety and security
measures a rating of ‘excellent’, 78.8% indicated their building complied
with OH&S standards. None of these libraries indicated their building did
not comply.
4.10 Community safety
Libraries were asked whether their building utilised certain types of security
measures to increase the safety of staff and patrons, as well as the resources
within the library buildings.
The proportion of buildings that have various security measures installed is
shown in Table 4.14.
Table 4.14: Types of security measures within library branch buildings (Q.30)
Yes
Security measure
Branches
No
%
Branches
%
Security alarm
168
69.1%
75
30.9%
Access control
42
17.3%
201
82.7%
Management plan/
procedures manual
183
75.3%
60
24.7%
Staff training
192
79.0%
51
21.0%
External lighting
209
86.0%
34
14.0%
Clearly marked fire exits
228
93.8%
15
6.2%
Fire extinguishers
234
96.3%
9
3.7%
Parking close to entry
197
81.1%
46
18.9%
Well-lit book return chutes
124
51.0%
119
49.0%
Fire alarms
137
56.4%
106
43.6%
- 100 -
Yes
No
Security measure
Branches
Sprinkler systems
50
20.6%
193
79.4%
Fireproof book return chutes
51
21.0%
192
79.0%
%
Branches
%
* One branch did not complete this question
Two-thirds (69.1%) of libraries indicated that a security system was
installed. One-half of library buildings (56.4%) possessed fire alarms. Such a
low proportion suggests some caution must be taken in interpreting these
figures, as it is possible that (for at least some of the libraries) a negative
response may be due to particular security (or fire) measures being part of
the whole building and not specifically for the library.
Notably, only a small proportion of library buildings, one-fifth (20.6%), had
sprinkler systems in place in case of fire; 3.7% did not have fire
extinguishers available within their library. A small proportion of branches
(6.1%) indicated fire exits were not clearly marked. Measures related to fire
safety are discussed in further detail in Section 4.9.2.
In terms of OH&S, three-quarters of libraries had a management plan
dealing with safety and undertook staff training to promote safety. A notable
proportion of libraries lacked features which promote the safety of staff using
the building after hours, for example, external lighting (14%) and parking
close to the entry (18.9%). Fifteen libraries indicated they had other safety
and security measures installed, including:
ƒ
CCTV/video surveillance.
ƒ
Security patrols, including by shopping centre security (six).
ƒ
Smoke detectors (one).
ƒ
Personal alarms (one).
ƒ
Hearing Loop, whole library (one).
It is probable that a higher proportion of libraries employ at least some of
these other measures but did not provide these details unprompted.
Respondents were also asked to rate their perception of the overall standard
of safety and security of their library. As shown by Table 4.15, the
overwhelming majority (92.5%) gave a rating of ‘satisfactory’ or ‘excellent’.
Respondents completing the survey were advised that a rating of
‘satisfactory’ indicated they felt safe at work.
Table 4.15: Survey respondents’ rating of safety and security measures (Q.31)
Rating
Excellent
Satisfactory
Branches*
%
33
13.6%
191
78.9%
Poor
18
7.4%
Total
242
100%
* Two branches did not complete this question
- 101 -
Analysis has been undertaken of the relationship between the overall rating
of library security and the types of measures in place within buildings. Of
those libraries that gave their overall branch safety a rating of ‘excellent’:
ƒ
81.8% complied with fire rating assessments, although 15.2% had not
undertaken such an assessment.
ƒ
78.8% possessed a security alarm, more than twice the proportion of
those branches that rated their overall measures as poor (38.9%).
ƒ
A significantly higher proportion undertook staff training (84.8%)
compared to those branches that gave a rating of poor (50%). Similar
results existed among branches that possessed management plans or
procedures manuals compared to those that did not (81.8% and 55.6%
respectively).
ƒ
Almost all (93.9%) utilised external lighting compared to less than twothirds (61.1%) of branches with an overall rating of ‘poor’.
ƒ
All possessed fire extinguishers, while 16.7% of branches with a rating of
‘poor’ did not.
ƒ
A higher proportion had parking close to the library entry compared to
libraries with a ‘poor’ rating (84.8% versus 72.2%).
ƒ
Less than two-thirds (61.1%) of libraries with an overall branch safety
rating of ‘poor’ had clearly marked fire exits, compared to 100% of
libraries with an ‘excellent’ rating and almost all (96.3%) with a
‘satisfactory’ rating.
It is, however, noted that feelings of safety are influenced by factors beyond
the design of a building, such as the surrounding neighbourhood. Such
relationships, which may influence the above information, cannot be tested
by the audit.
4.11 Tenure
Library services in Victoria do not own the buildings in which they operate.
Four-fifths (83.1%) of respondents indicated Council owned the building in
which their library was located. A further 10.7% are located within privately
owned buildings (Table 4.16). There did not appear to be any correlation
between the size (GFA) of libraries situated within Council-owned buildings
and those within privately owned buildings.
Table 4.16: Owner of library buildings (Q.18a)
Owner
Branches*
Council
202
Crown land
Private owner
%
83.1%
5
26
2.0%
10.7%
State Government body
6
2.5%
Community
(e.g. via Trustee)
2
0.8%
RSL
1
0.4%
- 102 -
Owner
Branches*
Private school
Total
%
1
0.4%
243
100%
* One branch did not complete this question
Unfortunately, 60.6% of libraries did not provide adequate detail regarding
their leasing arrangements. Of those libraries which provided information,
56.2% were not leased (Table 4.17).
Of those libraries which were leased, the majority were leased by Council
(80.9%). About one-half of Council-leased libraries were provided free to the
library service.
Table 4.17: Lessor of library building (Q.18b)
Lessor
Branches
%
Council
19
45.2%
Council provides building
free to library service
15
35.7%
Private owner
3
7.1%
Other
5
11.9%
Total*
42
100%
* 148 branches did not complete this question; 54 branches (22.1% of all branches) are not
leased.
Table 4.18 outlines the amount that libraries pay per year to lease their
library premises. One-half (50%) of leased libraries do not pay rent for their
premises; 8.7% of library buildings are leased for less than $1,000 per year.
It is noted there is some potential for error in these figures as the audit did
not clearly indicate over what period this cost was to be assessed.
Less than one-fifth (18.9%) of leased libraries (that provided data) have
outgoings included in the price of their lease. Utilities costs are discussed in
Section 6.4.
Table 4.18: Cost of lease (Q.18c)
Cost
$0
Branches
23
%
50.0%
$1–$999
4
8.7%
$2,500–$4,999
2
4.3%
$5,000–$9,999
3
6.5%
$10,000–$24,999
3
6.5%
$25,000–$49,999
4
8.7%
$50,000–$99,999
3
6.5%
- 103 -
Cost
$100,000>
Total
Branches
%
4
8.7%
46
100%
As discussed in Section 3.1, 28% of LGAs separately operated some form of
on- or off-site floorspace distinct from branch operations. This included
administration space (21.3%), storage space (17.3%) as well as other forms
of space (12%). The tenure arrangements of these centralised buildings are
identified in Table 4.19 and Table 4.20. As with branch libraries, the
majority are owned by Councils, with the exception of ‘other’ forms of space.
This reflects the nature of ‘other’ uses (such as mobile library parking). A
higher proportion of buildings used by central services are leased compared
to branch libraries. The majority of ‘other’ spaces are leased.
Table 4.19: Owner of centralised buildings (Q.6Ca)
Administration
Storage
Other
Owner
LGA
Council
13
81.3%
9
69.2%
3
33.3%
Private owner
2
12.5%
4
30.8%
2
22.2%
Crown land
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Community
owned
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
LGA did not
complete the
question
1
6.25%
0
0.0%
3
33.3%
16
100%
13
100%
9
100%
Total
%
LGA
%
LGA
%
Table 4.20: Lessor of centralised buildings (Q.6Ca)
Administration
Lessor
LGA
%
Storage
LGA
Other
%
LGA
%
Not leased
7
43.8%
5
38.5%
3
33.3%
Council
4
25.0%
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
Private owner
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Crown land
2
12.5%
4
30.8%
3
33.3%
Community
owned
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
11.1%
LGA did not
complete
question
3
18.8%
4
30.8%
1
11.1%
16
100%
13
100%
9
100%
Total
- 104 -
4.12 Future proofing
This section considers whether and how libraries in Victoria are adapting to
the demands of social and technological change.
4.12.1 Technology
Approximately three-quarters (78.6%) of libraries provide a computer
lab/internet area (Table 3.24). Approximately one-half of these (47.1%, or
37% of all libraries) indicated that floorspace within the library is provided
exclusively for this purpose, while 52.9% (41.4% of all libraries) provide
computer or internet facilities within an area that is also used for other
purposes.
At the time of the audit, 90.5% of branches did not provide wireless internet
access. Of the 23 branches that offered wireless internet, six (26.1%)
provided an area exclusively for this purpose, while the remaining 17
(73.9%) offered wireless internet within an area which was shared with other
library uses (Table 3.24).
4.12.2 Environmental sustainability
A series of questions were asked to ascertain compliance with various
building design codes. This included an indication of whether a formal
energy audit had been undertaken. One-quarter (25.5) of libraries indicated
they had undertaken an energy audit of their building, one-half (50.2%)
indicated that no such audit had been carried out, while a further onequarter (24.6%) did not know.
Of those libraries that had undertaken an energy audit, most had done so
recently (41.9% in 2006 or 2007). A further one-quarter (25.8%) had done so
during the period 2003–05.
Table 4.21: Energy audit undertaken (Q.28b)
Year
Branches
%
Year not provided
9
14.5%
<2000
3
4.8%
2000–2002
8
12.9%
2003–2005
16
25.8%
2006
18
29.0%
2007
8
12.9%
Total*
62
100%
* 122 branches (50.2% of all branches) haven’t undertaken an energy audit and 60 branches
(24.6% of all branches) don’t know if they have undertaken an energy audit.
Libraries were asked to indicate the types of energy-saving measures
installed in their building (Table 4.22). In Victoria, this includes:
ƒ
Four-fifths (81.1%) make use of natural light.
ƒ
Two-thirds (67.9%) have facilities for recycling.
ƒ
One-half (56%) utilise dual-flush toilets.
- 105 -
ƒ
Just one-quarter (27.6%) use energy-efficient light globes.
There is wide scope for future improvements in environmental sustainability,
including improvements to air-conditioning, and water efficiency.
Fifteen libraries (6.6%) identified several other sustainability measures they
implement. This included green power sources, waterless urinals, water
tanks, sensor lights which activate when a patron is browsing an area, and
building orientation for solar access.
Table 4.22: Energy-saving measures (Q.28a)
Yes
Measure
Natural light
Energy efficient light globes
Solar panels
Water efficient taps
Grey water usage
Branches
No
%
Branches
%
197
81.1%
46
18.9%
67
27.6%
176
72.4%
4
1.6%
239
98.4%
21
8.6%
222
91.4%
1
0.4%
242
99.6%
Energy efficient airconditioning/heating
37
15.2%
206
84.8%
Facilities for recycling
165
67.9%
78
32.1%
Dual flush toilets
136
56.0%
107
44.0%
Cycle parking or secure
storage
104
42.8%
139
57.2%
* One branch did not complete this question
- 106 -
Case study 9: Nathalia Library, Goulburn Valley Regional Library Corporation
Gross floor area:
220 sq m (274 sq m including shared meeting room).
User catchment:
3,289 (based on collector district population figures for
Nathalia and surrounding areas in 2001 Census)
Cost:
$300,000
Date completed:
20 March 2007
Usage:
Library visits in six months: 6,198
Loans in six months: 10,674
An existing older building, the core of which was constructed in 1957, was
redeveloped in late 2006/early 2007 to provide the Nathalia and district
community with a new library, Maternal and Child Health Centre, and toy
library. The centre also includes a public meeting room, kitchenette, and
toilet facilities. The collocation promotes cross-usage of these compatible
services, and has provided the community with an attractive and welcoming
centre.
Care was taken to ensure the building was sympathetic to the existing
streetscape and environment. Features such as the timber post veranda and
wheaten-coloured wall bagging reflect elements in the construction of the
adjoining Barmah Heritage Museum and DSE offices. Large windows provide
plenty of natural light and spacious views to the main street, picturesque
water tower and the adjacent bush block.
Usage has risen dramatically. In the first six months of operation, public
loans rose by 66% and visits to the library by 143%. The public meeting
room is also very well used. The community are very appreciative of their
new facility. The new library is now very visible in a high profile area of the
town, well-located in the main street, close to the shopping centre and main
centre of activity.
The $300,000 refurbishment was funded by $170,000 contributed by Moira
Shire Council, and a $130,000 State Government Living Libraries grant.
- 107 -
5. LOCATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Site has always been significant, and never more so than today, with so much
competition for our attention and so many demands on our time
(Jones 1997:397).
People places identifies a number of key locational criteria to be considered
in determining the most appropriate site for a public library, which have
been examined in the audit.
This section reviews locational characteristics of public libraries, including
proximity to other community facilities; street frontage; and accessibility
both by car, public transport and disability access. It draws conclusions
about whether buildings are, in fact, in the ‘right’ place in relation to
generally accepted location criteria.
5.1 Proximity to other community facilities
The proximity of library buildings to a range of community facilities and
services is identified in Table 5.1. Analysis of this data identifies:
ƒ
Surprisingly, no libraries were situated within a shopping centre.
However, 13.9% indicated they were located adjacent to one; a further
26.6% were located within walking distance (within 400 metres). This
does not support the growing trend identified in literature of public
libraries in both Australia and overseas locating in shopping centres,
with many library services finding that such branches are their busiest
(Johnstone 1999) as well as reciprocal flow-on benefits to the
surrounding businesses.
ƒ
However, about one-half of libraries were located on a main street
(shopping/business precinct), and 90% were located within 400 metres
(question 34).
ƒ
One-quarter (25.4%) of libraries are located within a Council
administration precinct. This includes 11.9% which are located within
the same building; a further 16.4% are located within 400 metres of such
a precinct. As expected, a high proportion of libraries were located near
other Council provided spaces, such as other cultural, recreational or
sporting facilities.
ƒ
Almost one-half (45.9%) were located within 400 metres of a school. A
small number (14, or 5.7%) were located within or adjacent to a school.
Nine libraries indicated they were facilities jointly used by a school.
ƒ
12.5% of libraries nominated other community facilities to which they
were proximate, including childcare centres and police stations.
- 108 -
Table 5.1: Proximity to community facilities (Q.34)
Within
building
Adjacent
Within
400m
Not
applicable
Branches
did not
complete
question
Shopping
centre
0
(0.00%)
34
(13.9%)
65
(26.6%)
118
(48.4%)
27
(11.1%)
244
(100%)
Business
precinct
0
(0.00%)
70
(28.7%)
130
(53.3%)
36
(14.8%)
8
(3.3%)
244
(100%)
Main street
0
(0.00%)
117
(48.0%)
103
(42.2%)
17
(7.0%)
7
(2.9%)
244
(100%)
Council
administration
precinct
29
(11.9%)
33
(13.5%)
40
(16.4%)
110
(45.1%)
32
(13.1%)
244
(100%)
School
4
(1.6%)
10
(4.1%)
98
(40.2%)
97
(39.8%)
35
(14.3%)
244
(100%)
Cultural
facilities
13
(5.3%)
32
(13.1%)
56
(23.0%)
105
(43.0%)
38
(15.6%)
244
(100%)
Eating
facilities
7
(2.9%)
49
(20.1%)
161
(66.0%)
21
(8.6%)
6
(2.5%)
244
(100%)
Recreation/
sporting
facility
3
(1.2%)
25
(10.2%)
82
(33.6%)
103
(42.2%)
31
(12.7%)
244
(100%)
Parks and
gardens
0
(0.0%)
49
(20.1%)
97
(39.8%)
75
(30.7%)
23
(9.4%)
244
(100%)
Proximity to
branches
Total
5.2 Way finding/street presence
As identified above by Jones (1997), just as important to a library as location
is ‘street presence’. Patrons must know that a library is present. A total of
94.3% of Victorian libraries have street frontage on the ground floor of a
building. Almost one-half (48%) of libraries are located on a main street.
External signage is discussed in detail in Section 4.7.1. Almost two-thirds
(65.4%) of libraries’ external signage was rated as either ‘satisfactory’ or
‘excellent’, while one-third (33.2%) was rated as ‘poor’.
5.3 External accessibility
Accessibility is an important aspect of any public facility: ‘a library must be
open and accessible to the whole community’ (Library Council of New South
Wales 2005:51). External accessibility to the library building was measured
through the audit in terms of car parking, public transport, and access for
people with a disability5.
5 Issues associated with the internal accessibility of public library buildings are discussed in
Section 4.5.
- 109 -
It is noted that external accessibility was perceived as a moderately
important feature of libraries by respondents; it was the fifth most common
response among the three best features of library buildings identified.
5.3.1 Car parking
Almost all libraries (95%) are located within walking distance of car parking;
86.5% of libraries were located adjacent to a car park. This car parking was
provided free of charge at almost all libraries (96.3%). Approximately onequarter (27.9%) indicated the current provision of car parking available near
the library was inadequate.
Libraries were asked to indicate the total number of parking spaces available
within close proximity to their library buildings, as well as the number of
these that were available solely for use by library patrons.
Just 3.7% of libraries had no car parking available nearby (Table 5.2). Most
libraries had a substantial amount of parking available nearby (38.5%
offered 50 or more spaces); only 10.3% had less than 10 spaces available.
In terms of car parking available exclusively for library patrons, all libraries
provided at least one space. Nearly one-half (41.8%) of libraries provided less
than 10 exclusive parking spaces. There was, however, a high rate of nonresponse for this question (46.7%).
Just less than one-half of libraries (44.3%) offered dedicated car parking
spaces for staff use. Of those libraries with staff parking, one-half (50.9%)
had less than five spaces; 19.6% provided just one car space.
Table 5.2: Car parking (Q.35a/c/e)
Exclusive library
patron use
Total
Car spaces
Branches
%
Branches
None
9
3.7%
0
1–4
8
3.3%
94
5–9
17
7.0%
10–49
96
50–99
%
Branches
%
136
55.7%
38.5%
55
22.5%
8
3.3%
28
11.5%
39.3%
22
9.0%
40
16.4%
4
1.6%
19
7.8%
100>
54
22.1%
2
0.8%
Number not
stated
20
8.2%
114
46.7%
6
2.5%
244
100%
244
100%
244
100%
Total
0.0%
Staff car parks
As shown in Table 5.3, 168 libraries (68.9%) indicated they offered at least
one wheelchair-accessible parking bay, and 167 of these indicated it was
located near the main entrance to the library building. Most libraries offered
just one such space. However, 31.1% (76 libraries) indicated they did not
offer any wheelchair-accessible parking bays.
- 110 -
Table 5.3: Wheelchair-accessible parking (Q.25e)
Wheelchair-accessible
parking bays
Branches*
%
None
76
31.1%
1
76
31.1%
2–4
73
29.9%
5–9
8
3.3%
10>
2
0.8%
Number not stated
9
3.7%
244
100%
Total
5.3.2 Public transport
The proportion of libraries located within close proximity to public transport,
while still significant, was notably less than those libraries accessible by car.
A total of 61.1% of Victorian public libraries are located within 400 metres of
public transport.
Libraries are significantly more likely to be located near a bus stop than a
train station. Almost three-quarters (73.8%) of Victorian libraries indicated
that a bus stop was located within 400 metres of their building, including
12.7% that stated it was located adjacent to the library.
Ten libraries also nominated that their building was located within 400
metres of a tram stop.
Table 5.4: Proximity to transport (Q.34)
Bus Stop
Proximity
Branches
Within
building
0
Adjacent
Train Station
%
Branches
Car Parking
%
Branches
%
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
31
12.7%
2
0.8%
211
Within 400m
149
61.1%
64
26.2%
21
8.6%
Not
applicable
44
18.0%
142
58.2%
5
2.0%
Branches did
not complete
question
20
8.2%
36
14.8%
6
2.5%
244
100%
244
100%
244
100%
Total
- 111 -
0.4%
86.5%
Case study 10: The Age (Broadmeadows) Library, Hume Global Village Library
Service
Gross floor area:
1,500 sq m
User catchment:
100,000 includes Jacana, Broadmeadows, Westmeadows,
Attwood, Dallas, Coolaroo, Meadow Heights, Greenvale,
Roxburgh Park
Cost:
$13,400,000
Architect:
PeddleThorp
Date completed:
May 2003
Usage:
280,000 visits annually
470,000 loans per year
31,500 internet bookings per month
283,000 collection items
14,000 attendances at programs annually
2,400 attendances monthly at outreach programs
The Age Library, situated in the Hume Global Learning Centre™, is the first
public library ever to be built in Broadmeadows. The centre forms an integral
part of Hume City Council’s vision of creating a learning community. The
Hume Global Learning Centre™ is dedicated to being a hub for a variety of
learning activities, information sharing and training for a community of
diverse cultures, ages and backgrounds.
- 112 -
The Age Library continued
Designed after extensive community consultation, its role is to enhance
social prosperity and well-being by creating opportunities for the Hume
community to participate in lifelong learning and to promote cultural
understanding. The centre provides a seamless interaction between
traditional library services and state-of-the-art learning facilities which are
additional and complementary to modern public library services.
The Age Library is situated on the first floor of the centre, providing a
dynamic space for community engagement and has in excess of 280,000
visits per year, making it obvious that the community vote with their feet!
- 113 -
6. ASSET MANAGEMENT
This section provides information on asset management (planning and
maintenance) undertaken by library services. A key outcome of asset
management is ensuring that buildings are managed and maintained
effectively and efficiently, and that they support the delivery of required
services. It covers such things as the design, construction, commissioning,
operations, maintenance, and decommissioning/replacement of plant,
equipment and facilities. It recognises that buildings have a lifespan – they
are planned, built, used and managed, and, when no longer required,
prepared for disposal.
6.1 Planning
A research report on public library services prepared by the Audit
Commission (United Kingdom) in 2002 found that the majority of libraries in
England and Wales lacked clear plans for maintaining and refurbishing
buildings, with ‘few having a clear fully costed preventative maintenance
program in place’ (Audit Commission (United Kingdom) 2002:40).
Approximately one-half (55.7%) of libraries have some form of asset
management plan for their building; a number of libraries did not know if a
plan existed (9%). Of those libraries that operated an asset management
plan, 43.4% had what could be regarded as a ‘medium-term’ planning
horizon, i.e. covered a period of between five and up to 10 years in duration.
Approximately one-fifth (22.1%) had a ‘long-term’ planning horizon, i.e.
covered a period of 20 years or more (Table 6.1). A notable proportion did not
identify their planning timeframe (16.9%). Two libraries identified that this
was due to their asset management plan being based on component lifecycle
and, as such, the year varies dependant on the component. A number of
Councils operated a generic asset management plan for all buildings in
which the library was included.
Table 6.1: Duration of asset management plan (Q.36b)
Duration (Years)
Branches
%
1
1
0.7%
3–4
8
5.9%
5–9
59
43.4%
10–19
15
11.0%
20>
30
22.1%
Year not indicated
23
16.9%
136
100%
Total
In terms of the scope of asset management plans, only two-thirds covered
planned maintenance (63.2%). This was, however, the most common element
of library asset management plans (Table 6.2). One-quarter (24.3%) dealt
with the planned refurbishment of their building. Planned closure of their
branch was identified in 3.7% of plans.
- 114 -
Other works covered by library asset management plans included the
replacement of an air-conditioning unit and recarpeting.
Table 6.2: Scope of asset management plan (Q.36b)
Scope
Branches*
%
Maintenance
86
63.2%
Refurbishment of
existing building
33
24.3%
Extensions
12
8.8%
New Building
12
8.8%
Relocation
6
4.4%
Closure
5
3.7%
Other
18
13.2%
* 136 branches responded that they have an asset management plan
Respondents were also asked to indicate the year that planned works were
due to take place under the asset management plan. While the high rate of
non-response for each item (on average 62%) limits the validity of any
detailed analysis, these results are presented in Table 6.3.
Table 6.3: Timeframe of asset management plan actions (Q.36b)
2006
2007
2008–
2009
2010–
2014
2015>
Not
stated
Total
2
(16.7%)
1
(8.3%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(25.0%)
1
(8.3%)
5
(41.7%)
12
(100%)
Closure
0
(0.0%)
1
(100%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(100%)
Relocation
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(33.3%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(66.7%)
6
(100%)
Refurbishment
2
(6.1%)
6
(18.2%)
3
(9.1%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(6.1%)
20
(60.6%)
33
(100%)
Extensions
0
(0.0%)
1
(8.3%)
1
(8.3%)
1
(8.3%)
0
(0.0%)
9
(75.0%)
12
(100%)
Maintenance
1
(1.2%)
12
(14.0%)
5
(5.8%)
9
(10.5%)
3
(3.5%)
56
(65.1%)
86
(100%)
Other works
0
(0.0%)
6
(33.3%)
1
(5.6%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
11
(61.1%)
18
(100%)
Timeframe
New building
- 115 -
Case study 11: East Melbourne Library, Melbourne Library Service
Gross floor area:
710 sq m
User catchment:
Local and bordering neighbourhoods of East Melbourne,
Jolimont, South Bank, West Richmond, South Yarra
Cost:
$4.95 million
Architect:
City of Melbourne, City Projects
Date completed:
August 2006
Usage:
122,000 loans per annum*
79,000 visits per annum*
*Estimate based on August–December 2006 usage
The new East Melbourne Library replaces a small, mid-twentieth century
library located on the same site. Consistent with City of Melbourne’s strong
commitment to environmental responsibility, the library has been designed
in line with best practice environmental sustainability principles.
Located in a relatively quiet residential area, the library has a strong
physical presence while blending harmoniously with the streetscape. For an
imposing and architecturally striking building it does not in any way
overwhelm or subdue its surroundings.
As a relatively new facility, it is quickly becoming a vibrant community hub
with further opportunities to partner with Council and community
stakeholders to provide a range of services and programs that meet the
needs of the local and broader community.
- 116 -
East Melbourne Library continued
Examples of this include use of the superb meeting space for musical
performance, health and well-being programs, and talks on topics of interest
such as environmental sustainability.
The most striking feature of the East Melbourne Library and Community
Centre is its use of leading technologies and systems to minimise
environmental impact during construction and over the life of the building.
These initiatives can be considered broadly from the two views of the
building operation, and the furniture and fit-out, both of which combine to
demonstrate that environmental design does not compromise aesthetic
comfort but rather creates a healthy and exciting community facility.
The selection of loose furniture items has been guided by strict Ecologically
Sustainable Development (ESD) principles to ensure congruity with the
overall building fabric and operation. Significant use has been made of
recycled materials, which have been used in the shelving, chairs, tables,
floors, garden and outdoor seating areas, just to list a few. Water harvesting
systems optimise rain water for toilets and gardens.
Melbourne Library Service is developing a dynamic ESD collection and
information program to support sustainability awareness in the community.
Given that the East Melbourne Library continues to attract considerable
attention due to its innovative design, it is only logical that the resources will
be located at and programs will be run out of this facility.
- 117 -
6.2 Assessment
Building condition surveys are undertaken by library services or LGAs for
almost four-fifths (79.1%) of Victorian library branches (Table 6.4). This
figure may be higher as there was a non-response rate of 15.6% for this
question. Thirteen (5.3%) libraries indicated that no regular condition
surveys are conducted of their building.
Of those libraries which undertake surveys, over one-half (55.4%, 43.8%
overall) of libraries indicated that condition surveys are undertaken of their
buildings on at least an annual basis. A small number of libraries (nine, or
4.6%) undertook surveys at intervals of greater than five years.
Table 6.4: Building condition surveys (Q.42)
Frequency
Branches
%
<5 years
9
2–5 years
56
23.0%
Every second year
21
8.6%
Yearly
94
38.5%
Several times a year
13
5.3%
Not done
13
5.3%
Branches did not
complete question
38
15.6%
244
100%
Total
3.7%
6.3 Maintenance
At least $5.7 million is spent each year on maintaining public library
buildings in Victoria. This figure is expected to be notably higher, as 34
libraries (representing 13.9% of Victorian libraries), did not provide their
annual maintenance expenditure.
On average, approximately $27,232 is spent on the maintenance of each
public library branch. On average, $43.50 is spent on maintenance per sq m
of library floorspace. Interpretation of this average should, however, be
informed by the correlation between library size (floorspace) and
maintenance costs6.
Maintenance costs for individual libraries ranged from $70 (considered to be
unfeasibly low) to $325,000 per year. On an annual basis, 30.3% spent less
than $10,000, 43% spent between $10,000 and $50,000, 9% spent between
$50,000 and $100,000, and 3.7% spent more than $100,000 (Table 6.5).
6 The correlation coefficient = 0.513. Maintenance costs range from $2 to $330 per sq m.
- 118 -
Table 6.5: Annual maintenance costs (Q.38)
Cost
<$1000
Branches
%
8
3.3%
$1,000–$2,499
13
5.3%
$2,500–$4,999
13
5.3%
$5,000–$7,499
23
9.4%
$7,500–$9,999
17
7.0%
$10,000–$14,999
19
7.8%
$15,000–$19,999
20
8.2%
$20,000–$49,999
66
27.0%
$50,000–$99,999
22
9.0%
9
3.7%
$100,000>
Branches did not
complete question
Total
34
13.9%
244
100%
Libraries were also asked to provide a breakdown of maintenance expenses.
However, each category (Table 6.6) had a high non-response rate (between
30% and 90%), thereby limiting any interpretation of responses. However,
from the responses received, Victorian libraries spend on an annual basis
between:
ƒ
$15 and $68,666 on cleaning.
ƒ
$22 and $60,000 on unplanned reactive maintenance.
ƒ
$200 and $85,800 on planned preventative maintenance.
ƒ
$200 and $60,000 on planned works programs (condition-based).
ƒ
$10 and $300,000 on major plant and equipment replacement.
ƒ
$500 and $91,000 on other maintenance expenses.
Some minimum expenditure identified is at values which question the
accuracy of responses.
Other maintenance costs were identified by some libraries, for expenditure
on graffiti removal, security and fire services, as well as other general
maintenance.
- 119 -
Table 6.6: Breakdown of maintenance expenses (Q.38)
Planned
preventative
maintenance
Planned
works
program
(conditionbased)
Major
plant &
equipment
replacement
Other
maintenance
expenses
Annual
maintenance
Annual
cleaning
Unplanned
maintenance
<$1,000
8
(3.3%)
6
(2.5%)
29
(11.9%)
6
(2.5%)
3
(1.2%)
2
(0.8%)
2
(0.8%)
$1,000–
$2,499
13
(5.3%)
16
(6.6%)
29
(11.9%)
32
(13.1%)
14
(5.7%)
5
(2.0%)
3
(1.2%)
$2,500–
$4,999
13
(5.3%)
19
(7.8%)
26
(10.7%)
17
(7.0%)
2
(0.8%)
4
(1.6%)
2
(0.8%)
$5,000–
$7,499
23
(9.4%)
30
(12.3%)
19
(7.8%)
10
(4.1%)
8
(3.3%)
3
(1.2%)
4
(1.6%)
$7,500–
$9,999
17
(7.0%)
17
(7.0%)
2
(0.8%)
6
(2.5%)
4
(1.6%)
2
(0.8%)
1
(0.4%)
$10,000–
$14,999
19
(7.8%)
21
(8.6%)
8
(3.3%)
10
(4.1%)
7
(2.9%)
2
(0.8%)
2
(0.8%)
$15,000–
$19,999
20
(8.2%)
22
(9.0%)
8
(3.3%)
7
(2.9%)
0
(0.0%)
8
(3.3%)
3
(1.2%)
$20,000–
$49,999
66
(27.0%)
41
(16.8%)
4
(1.6%)
6
(2.5%)
7
(2.9%)
1
(0.4%)
3
(1.2%)
$50,000–
$99,999
22
(9.0%)
1
(0.4%)
1
(0.4%)
1
(0.4%)
1
(0.4%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(0.4%)
$100,000
>
9
(3.7%)
0
(0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(1.6%)
0
(0.0%)
Sub-total
210
(86.1%)
173
(70.9%)
126
(51.6%)
95
(38.9%)
46
(18.9%)
31
(12.7%)
21
(8.6%)
Branches
did not
complete
question
34
(13.9%)
71
(29.1%)
118
(48.4%)
149
(61.1%)
198
(81.1%)
213
(87.3%)
223
(91.4%)
244
(100%)
244
(100%)
244
(100%)
244
(100%)
244
(100%)
244
(100%)
244
(100%)
Cost
Total
Libraries were also asked to identify the extent to which any maintenance
backlog existed for their building. The majority (81.6%) of libraries did not
identify a maintenance backlog. It is likely, given the high non-response rate
for asset management questions in general, that some of these libraries will
have a backlog but have been unable to quantify it. Of the 45 branches
which identified a backlog of maintenance of their buildings, 40% identified
that the backlog exceeded $25,000 (Table 6.7).
- 120 -
Table 6.7: Estimated backlog of planned maintenance (Q.39)
Cost
Branches*
%
<$500
1
2.2%
$1,000–$1,999
3
6.7%
$2,000–$4,999
7
15.6%
$5,000–$9,999
7
15.6%
$10,000–$24,999
9
20.0%
$25,000>
18
40.0%
Total
45
100%
* 199 branches did not complete this question
6.4 Utilities spend
Libraries were asked to indicate the amount spent each quarter on utilities,
including gas, electricity and water. Respondents were instructed to leave
the question blank if no service was present, and insert $0 if present but free
of charge.
Overall, electricity was the largest utility expenditure (Table 6.8). On average,
libraries spend about $4,600 on electricity, $1,100 on gas, and $500 on
water (approximately $5,500 per quarter in total). Utilities expenditure is
correlated with floorspace, and on average $8 per sq m for utilities.
Table 6.8: Summary of utilities expenditure (Q.29)
Per quarter
Electricity
Gas
Water
Total utilities
$6.95
$1.40
$0.70
$8.07
Mean expenditure
$4,679.68
$1,168.46
$515.76
$5,486.16
Median expenditure
$3,131.00
$958.00
$250.00
$3,812.00
Average expenditure
per sq m*
* Of those libraries which provided information. Total utilities averages are not directly
comparable as not all questions were answered.
The 186 branches (76.2%) that provided information for this question spend
a total of approximately $809,585 on electricity each quarter. Individual
expenditure on electricity ranged from nothing to $68,429 per quarter
(Table 6.9). A small proportion (7%) indicated they did not have any
electricity expenses, due to such expenses being covered by Council or
building owner. Nearly one-half of libraries (45.7%) spend less than $2,500
per quarter on electricity; a further 39.8% spend between $2,500 and
$7,500. In interpreting these statistics it is noted that almost one-quarter
(23.8%) of all library branches participating in the survey did not indicate
their quarterly electricity expenditure.
- 121 -
Table 6.9: Quarterly expenditure on electricity (Q.29)
Cost
Branches*
%
$0
13
7.0%
$1–$999
37
19.9%
$1,000–$2,499
35
18.8%
$2,500–$4,999
47
25.3%
$5,000–$7,499
27
14.5%
$7,500–$9,999
18
9.7%
$10,000–$14,999
6
3.2%
$15,000>
3
1.6%
186
100%
Total
* 58 branches (23.8%) did not complete this question
The majority of libraries indicated their building was supplied with gas
(65.2%). It is likely, however, that this figure contains a component of nonresponses. The total cost of gas among the 85 branches that provided details
was $78,287 per quarter. Individual expenditures on gas ranged from
nothing to $9,800 per quarter. A notable proportion of libraries did not pay
for gas usage (21.2%) (Table 6.10).
Total expenditure on water per quarter was $72,206. Individual costs ranged
from nothing to $6,914, with nearly one-half (42.9%) spending less than
$250 per quarter. In total, 61.1% spent less than $500 on water each
quarter (Table 6.10). In interpreting these statistics it is noted that
approximately one-third (36.9%) of all library branches participating in the
survey did not indicate their quarterly water expenditure.
Table 6.10: Quarterly expenditure on gas and water (Q.29)
Gas
Cost
Branches*
Water
%
Branches**
%
$0
18
21.2%
14
9.1%
$1–$249
16
18.8%
66
42.9%
$250–$499
8
9.4%
28
18.2%
$500–$749
4
4.7%
18
11.7%
$750–$999
7
8.2%
9
5.8%
18.8%
9
5.8%
4.7%
2
1.3%
$1,000–$1,499
16
$1,500–$1,999
4
$2,000>
12
14.1%
8
5.2%
Total
85
100%
154
100%
* 159 (65.2%) and ** 90 (36.9%) branches did not complete this question
- 122 -
Case study 12: Carnegie Library, Glen Eira Library Service
Gross floor area:
1,042 sq m
User catchment:
25,000
The Carnegie catchment figure includes the population of
the suburbs of Carnegie, Murrumbeena and half of
Glenhuntly.
Cost:
$10.4 million
Architect:
Perrott Lyon Mathieson
Date completed:
October 2005
Usage:
2005/2006: 1,240,548 loans and 689,396 visits
The Carnegie Library and Community Centre is a brilliant illustration of a
Council working in partnership with its community to create a civic hub and
focal point for local people to participate in and enrich community life.
The Library and Community Centre includes a state-of-the-art library,
community meeting and function rooms, a multi-purpose children’s area,
and a contemporary urban playground incorporating colourful ‘bookworm’
sculptures. It is linked to the local shopping strip by a landscaped
pedestrian walk and the design of the Centre gives it a significant presence
in the local shopping and business precinct without adversely impacting on
adjoining residential streets.
The centre’s success has confirmed the benefits of collocating community
services in activity centres to maximise community participation, economic
benefit to local business, and strengthen a sense of local identity and
belonging.
- 123 -
Carnegie Library continued
The centre offers a range of activities that 1,200 people per day come to the
Centre to participate in: library visits, family storytime sessions, playgroups,
senior citizens’ social events, and health and well-being activities such as
recreation classes and immunisation sessions.
Significant features of the library are the children’s area and adjacent events
area which have proved extremely popular with children and families. The
numbers of people attending preschool and babytime storytime sessions
have grown to almost 400 per week.
The pride in the Carnegie Library and Community Centre extends beyond its
elegant design and stunning appearance; it has been immensely satisfying to
see the extent of community ownership of the centre – evident from the
opening celebrations which attracted over 8,000 people.
Since its opening, library usage has grown significantly. Loans have
increased by over 300% per week compared to levels at the previous
shopfront library.
- 124 -
7. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
This section reviews current planning and development processes, including
planned refurbishment; new buildings planned; and planned replacement
other on the same or a new site. Details provided include the types of works
planned; timeframe; Gross Floor Area; budget; and locational attributes of
new sites.
Research in Australia and overseas has identified that ‘the strengths and
weaknesses of a new public library building within a community are
established with the initial conditions of planning and construction’ (Bryson
et al 2003:8).
People places identifies the recommended stages to work through in order to
plan a new library building. It nominates a range of key design factors which
continually emphasise the influence of the people on every stage of the
planning process considering ‘how:
ƒ
people use buildings;
ƒ
they perceive them;
ƒ
accessible the buildings are for people of varying mobility;
ƒ
user needs must be respected when ecological sustainability is
incorporated;
ƒ
user characteristics must be considered when furniture is selected or
designed or when shelving is set out;
ƒ
safety and security issues will impact on people’ (Jones 2001:82).
Similar questions must also be considered by library managers when they
evaluate their building for future users.
Jones (2003) has commented on the flexibility of library buildings built in
different eras and their suitability for renovation, with the obvious
constraints of most of the older structures. One-half (50%) of libraries
indicated their building was capable of accommodating expansion.
7.1 Perceived need for redevelopment
Sixty libraries, representing one-quarter (24.6%) of respondents, perceived
that either major refurbishments or extensions (or both) would be required
to their library branches within the next five years.
However, only about one-half (56.7%) of those libraries where refurbishment
was perceived as required indicated that improvements of some kind were
actually planned for their building.
7.2 Overview of planned library development
The Audit collected details on the planned development of library buildings
in Victoria. The branch library survey collected data on the refurbishment or
replacement of existing branch library buildings, while the LGA survey
collected data on the planned construction of new branch buildings.
Many of these planned developments (46%) involve refurbishment of the
existing building fabric; however, just as many libraries are to be demolished
and rebuilt (48%). Seventeen libraries are to be removed to a new location
following demolition, while eight are to be rebuilt at the same location. This
- 125 -
suggests that many existing libraries are constrained in a way which cannot
be remedied by refurbishment.
In addition, there are plans to construct 19 completely new libraries around
Victoria. New buildings are planned by 14 library services (within 15 LGAs).
Geelong Regional Library Corporation and Wellington Shire Library Service
have plans for two new libraries. Wyndham Library Service has plans for
three new libraries. Eleven library services plan the addition of only one new
library. Table 7.2 identifies the form of library development planned by its
location.
Table 7.1: Planned library development in Victoria (Q.7)
Development
Branches
Refurbishment of
existing branch
%
24
9.8%
Replacement – on site
8
3.3%
Replacement –
relocation to new site
17
7.0%
Unspecified works to
existing building
3
1.2%
No planned works
(existing building)
Not stated
Total
Construction of a new
branch library
182
74.6%
10
4.1%
244
100%
19
7.8%*
* percentage of existing libraries
- 126 -
Table 7.2: Location of planned library development (Q.7)
Library Service
LGA
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
Bayside Library
Service
Bayside City Council
Brimbank
Libraries
Brimbank City Council
1
Campaspe
Regional Library
Campaspe Shire
Council
1
Casey-Cardinia
Library
Corporation
Cardinia Shire Council
Central Highlands
Regional Library
City of Boroondara
Library Service
Casey City Council
Replacement –
on site
Replacement –
new site
Unspecified works
to existing
Not
stated
No
change
4
4
1
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
Ararat Rural City
Council
1
Ballarat City Council
3
Central Goldfields Shire
Council
1
Hepburn Shire Council
3
Moorabool Shire
Council
1
Pyrenees Shire Council
2
Southern Grampians
Shire Council
1
Boroondara City
Council
1
1
- 127 -
3
Library Service
LGA
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement –
on site
Darebin Libraries
Darebin City Council
East Gippsland
Shire Library
East Gippsland Shire
Council
1
1
Knox City Council
1
1
Eastern Regional
Libraries
Replacement –
new site
Unspecified works
to existing
Not
stated
4
1
3
3
Maroondah City
Council
1
1
Yarra Ranges Shire
Council
1
6
Frankston Library
Service
Frankston City Council
Gannawarra
Library Service
Gannawarra Shire
Council
2
1
3
Borough of
Queenscliffe
Geelong Regional
Library
Corporation
1
Golden Plains Shire
Council
1
Greater Geelong City
Council
2
1
1
Surf Coast Shire
Council
Glen Eira Library
and Information
Service
No
change
Glen Eira City Council
7
1
1
1
1
3
- 128 -
Library Service
Glenelg Libraries
Goldfields Library
Corporation
Goulburn Valley
Regional Library
Corporation
LGA
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement –
on site
Replacement –
new site
No
change
3
Greater Bendigo City
Council
5
Loddon Shire Council
1
Macedon Ranges Shire
Council
2
1
Mount Alexander Shire
Council
1
Greater Shepparton
City Council
3
Moira Shire Council
1
1
Greater Dandenong
City Council
1
Alpine Shire Council
High Country
Library
Corporation
Not
stated
Glenelg Shire Council
Strathbogie Shire
Council
Greater
Dandenong
Libraries
Unspecified works
to existing
Benalla Rural City
Council
3
2
1
3
1
1
Mansfield Shire Council
1
Wangaratta Rural City
Council
1
- 129 -
Library Service
LGA
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement –
on site
Replacement –
new site
Unspecified works
to existing
Not
stated
No
change
Hobsons Bay
Libraries
Hobsons Bay City
Council
1
2
2
Hume Global
Learning Village
Library Service
Hume City Council
1
1
4
Kingston
Information and
Library Service
Kingston City Council
1
Latrobe City
Library Service
Latrobe City Council
Maribyrnong
Library Service
Maribyrnong City
Council
1
Melbourne Library
Service
Melbourne City Council
2
Melton Library and
Information
Service
Melton Shire Council
Mildura Rural City
Council Library
Service
Mildura Rural City
Council
1
Macedon Ranges Shire
Council
1
Mitchell Shire
Library and
Information
Service
Monash Public
Library Service
8
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
Mitchell Shire Council
1
3
Monash City Council
1
4
- 130 -
Library Service
LGA
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement –
on site
Replacement –
new site
Unspecified works
to existing
Not
stated
No
change
Moonee Valley
Library
Service
Moonee Valley City
Council
Moreland City
Libraries
Moreland City Council
Mornington
Peninsula
Library
Mornington Peninsula
Shire Council
Murrindindi
Library Service
Murrindindi Shire
Council
Port Phillip
Library Service
Port Phillip City Council
5
Stonnington
Library and
Information
Service
Stonnington City
Council
4
Swan Hill
Regional Library
Service
Swan Hill Rural City
Council
Upper Murray
Regional Library
Wellington Shire
Library
2
1
1
2
5
4
1
2
1
1
Indigo Shire Council
3
Towong Shire Council
2
Wodonga City Council
1
Wellington Shire
Council
2
6
- 131 -
Library Service
West Gippsland
Regional Library
Corporation
LGA
Bass Coast Shire
Council
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
1
1
2
1
3
Baw Baw Shire Council
Replacement –
on site
Replacement –
new site
South Gippsland Shire
Council
Whitehorse
Manningham
Regional Library
Corporation
Wimmera Regional
Library
Corporation
Unspecified works
to existing
Not
stated
No
change
5
Manningham City
Council
1
Whitehorse City
Council
2
3
2
Buloke Shire Council
1
Hindmarsh Shire
Council
2
Horsham Rural City
Council
1
Northern Grampians
Shire Council
2
West Wimmera Shire
Council
4
Yarriambiack Shire
Council
1
Wyndham City
Library Service
Wyndham City Council
Yarra Libraries
Yarra City Council
3
2
1
- 132 -
4
Library Service
Yarra Plenty
Regional Library
Service
LGA
New
building
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement –
on site
Banyule City Council
Replacement –
new site
Unspecified works
to existing
Not
stated
1
Nillumbik Shire Council
2
1
1
Whittlesea City Council
Total
No
change
3
19
24
8
- 133 -
17
3
10
182
7.3 Timeframe
The majority of libraries (67.6%) indicated their planned developments would
be completed (and the upgraded library operational) in less than four years
(Table 7.3); one-third would be completed in the next two years.
The form of development planned is reflected in development timeframes.
Nearly two-thirds of refurbishments (62.5%) are planned for completion in
the next two years, while only 21.1% of new buildings have imminent plans
for construction. Plans for the demolition and removal of libraries are longer
term, with two-thirds (64.7%) to be undertaken in more than four years
time.
Table 7.3: Timeframe of library development (Q.7)
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
Yes,
unstated
New
building
Total
<2 years
15
(62.5%)
2
(25.0%)
4
(23.5%)
1
(33.3%)
4
(21.1%)
26
(36.6%)
2–4 years
5
(20.8%)
5
(62.5%)
2
(11.8%)
1
(33.3%)
9
(47.4%)
22
(31.0%)
4> years
4
(16.7%)
1
(12.5%)
11
(64.7%)
0
(0.0%)
6
(31.6%)
22
(31.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(33.3%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(1.4%)
24
(100%)
8
(100%)
17
(100%)
3
(100%)
19
(100%)
71
(100%)
Timeframe
Branch did
not complete
question
Total
7.4 Budget
Local Government in Victoria has plans to spend $150.2 million on library
building development in the next five years. A further $19.1 million is
planned to be spent on internal assets (e.g. shelving, etc.). This excludes
budget for book stock and other resources.
While 46% of planned developments involve refurbishment of an existing
building, all but $7 million of this capital budget is to be spent on new
buildings. The average budget for a new building is $4.6 million. The average
budget for a new building is notably lower than the average allowed for
construction of a replacement building (Table 7.4).
In comparison, just $350,000 is allowed on average for refurbishment of an
existing library. This figure is skewed by some planned developments, as
reflected by the median value of just $192,000. As identified in Table 7.4,
20.8% of planned refurbishments have a budget of less than $25,000.
- 134 -
Table 7.4: Capital budget (Q.7)
Capital
budget
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
Yes,
unstated
New
building
Total
<$25,000
5
(20.8%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
5
(7.0%)
$25,000–
$49,999
1
(4.2%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(1.4%)
$50,000–
$99,999
2
(8.3%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(2.8%)
$100,000–
$249,999
4
(16.7%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(5.3%)
5
(7.0%)
$250,000–
$499,999
1
(4.2%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(10.5%)
3
(4.2%)
$500,000–
$999,999
6
(25.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(5.9%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(5.3%)
8
(11.3%)
$1,000,000–
$1,999,999
1
(4.2%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(10.5%)
3
(4.2%)
$2,000,000–
$4,999,999
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
6
(31.6%)
21
(29.6%)
$5,000,000>
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(15.8%)
3
(4.2%)
Branch did
not provide
data
Total
6
(75.0%)
9
(52.9%)
4
(16.7%)
2
(25.0%)
7
(41.2%)
3
(100%)
4
(21.1%)
20
(28.2%)
24
(100%)
8
(100%)
17
(100%)
3
(100%)
19
(100%)
71
(100%)
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
New building
Total
$6,947,900
$39,400,000
$52,350,000
$51,482,000
$150,179,900
Average value
$347,395
$6,566,666
$5,235,000
$3,432,133
$2,944,703
Median value
$192,500
$5,500,000
$4,250,000
$1,037,500
$1,800,000
Capital budget
Total value
- 135 -
Table 7.5: Internal fit-out budget (Q.7)
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
Yes,
unstated
New
building
Total
<$15,000
3
(12.5%)
1
(12.5%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(15.8%)
7
(9.9%)
$15,000–
$49,999
5
(20.8%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(10.5%)
7
(9.9%)
$50,000–
$99,999
4
(16.7%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(5.6%)
$100,000–
$199,999
4
(16.7%)
1
(12.5%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(5.3%)
6
(8.5%)
$200,000–
$499,999
0
(0.0%)
2
(25.0%)
2
(11.8%)
0
(0.0%)
5
(26.3%)
9
(12.7%)
$500,000>
0
(0.0%)
1
(12.5%)
5
(29.4%)
0
(0.0%)
5
(26.3%)
11
(15.5%)
Branch did
not provide
data
8
(33.3%)
3
(37.5%)
10
(58.8%)
3
(100%)
3
(15.8%)
27
(38.0%)
24
(100%)
8
(100%)
17
(100%)
3
(100%)
19
(100%)
71
(100%)
Budget
Total
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
New building
Total
$826,200
$4,750,000
$7,250,000
$6,280,250
$19,106,450
Average value
$51,637
$950,000
$1,035,714
$392,515
$1,194,153.13
Median value
$57,000
$325,000
$1,200,000
$9,625
$100,000
Budget
Total value
7.5 Planned scope of alterations
7.5.1 Floorspace
Following implementation of all planned library developments, library
floorspace in Victoria will increase by 37,363 sq m. This is an average of
593 sq m per development; however, proposals greatly vary in size.
Approximately one-third of library developments plan to provide substantial
increases in library floorspace (greater than 500 sq m). A further one-quarter
of library developments do not propose to increase the floorspace available at
the library (Table 7.6). In proportional terms, just over one-quarter of
libraries (26.6%) propose to more than double their existing floorspace
through redevelopment (Table 7.7).
Those libraries which are to be demolished and replaced at the same location
generally do so to increase their floorspace, with most (50%) doing so
substantially (over 1,000 sq m); a similar pattern is evident in all new
buildings. As noted above, one-half of libraries indicated their building was
not capable of accommodating expansion.
- 136 -
Table 7.6: Proposed additional floorspace (Q.7)
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
Yes,
unstated
New
building
Total
10
(41.7%)
0
(0.0%)
5
(29.4%)
2
(66.7%)
1
(5.3%)
18
(25.4%)
1
(4.2%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(1.4%)
50–149
4
(16.7%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(5.6%)
150–299
5
(20.8%)
1
(12.5%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(10.5%)
8
(11.3%)
300–499
2
(8.3%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(17.6%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(15.8%)
8
(11.3%)
500–999
1
(4.2%)
1
(12.5%)
2
(11.8%)
0
(0.0%)
7
(36.8%)
11
(15.5%)
1,000>
0
(0.0%)
4
(50.0%)
5
(29.4%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(21.1%)
13
(18.3%)
Branch did
not provide
data
1
(4.2%)
2
(25.0%)
2
(11.8%)
1
(33.3%)
2
(10.5%)
8
(11.3%)
24
(100%)
8
(100%)
17
(100%)
3
(100%)
19
(100%)
71
(100%)
Sq m
0
1–49
Total
Increase in
floorspace
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
New building
Total
Total increase
in floorspace
2,492 sq m
11,160 sq m
11,316 sq m
12,395 sq m
37,363 sq m
Average
increase
108.3 sq m
1,860.0 sq m
754.4 sq m
729.1 sq m
593.1 sq m
Median
increase
50 sq m
1,100 sq m
400 sq m
645 sq m
300 sq m
- 137 -
Table 7.7: Change in Gross Floor Area after redevelopment (Q.7)
GFA Increase
0%
Branches*
17
%
26.6%
1%–10%
1
1.6%
11%–25%
3
4.7%
26%–50%
3
4.7%
51%–100%
9
14.1%
101%–200%
11
17.2%
201%–500%
4
6.3%
501%>
2
3.1%
* 14 branches (21.9%) did not complete this question
7.5.2 Internal reconfiguration
Libraries were asked to specify what types of alterations were planned to
existing buildings. From Table 7.8, it can be seen that:
ƒ
More than one-half (60%) will create additional floorspace. No
redevelopment will lead to a decrease in floorspace.
ƒ
Almost four-fifths (79.2%) of refurbishments involve an internal
reorganisation of space. One-half (50%) of refurbishments will alter the
internal structure of the building.
ƒ
Improvements are planned to all functional library areas by
approximately one-half of redevelopments. Refurbishments are most
likely to make improvements to reading and study areas (66.7%) followed
by collection areas (54.2%). Improvements to shelving are important,
being undertaken in one-half of refurbishments.
ƒ
Many refurbishments involve cosmetic improvements, with 62.5%
planning new carpet, and 70.8% painting.
ƒ
One-half (50%) of refurbishments will have increased computer access
and more than one-quarter (29.2%) will provide wireless internet.
ƒ
Close to one-half (45.8%) of refurbishments plan to improve access for
people with a disability.
- 138 -
Table 7.8: Type of alterations planned (Q.7)
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
Yes,
unstated
Total
Internal
reorganisation
of space
19
(79.2%)
3
(50.0%)
6
(35.3%)
1
(33.3%)
29
(58.0%)
Additional
floorspace
14
(58.3%)
4
(66.7%)
11
(64.7%)
1
(33.3%)
30
(60.0%)
Decreased
floorspace
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
Internal
structural
alterations
12
(50.0%)
2
(33.3%)
3
(17.6%)
0
(0.0%)
17
(34.0%)
Improved
collection areas
13
(54.2%)
4
(66.7%)
10
(58.8%)
1
(33.3%)
28
(56.0%)
Improved
reading and
study areas
16
(66.7%)
3
(50.0%)
10
(58.8%)
0
(0.0%)
29
(58.0%)
Improved
resource areas
11
(45.8%)
4
(66.7%)
10
(58.8%)
0
(0.0%)
25
(50.0%)
Improved staff
areas
8
(33.3%)
3
(50.0%)
10
(58.8%)
0
(0.0%)
21
(42.0%)
Improved
amenities areas
7
(29.2%)
3
(50.0%)
10
(58.8%)
0
(0.0%)
20
(40.0%)
2
(8.3%)
0
(0.0%)
6
(35.3%)
0
(0.0%)
8
(16.0%)
12
(50.0%)
3
(50.0%)
10
(58.8%)
0
(0.0%)
25
(50.0%)
1
(4.2%)
2
(33.3%)
4
(23.5%)
0
(0.0%)
7
(14.0%)
Fire safety
improvements
6
(25.0%)
3
(50.0%)
7
(41.2%)
0
(0.0%)
16
(32.0%)
Improved
disabled access
11
(45.8%)
4
(66.7%)
5
(29.4%)
0
(0.0%)
20
(40.0%)
Energy
consumption
improvements
8
(33.3%)
4
(66.7%)
7
(41.2%)
0
(0.0%)
19
(38.0%)
Increased
computer
access
12
(50.0%)
4
(66.7%)
8
(47.1%)
0
(0.0%)
24
(48.0%)
Wireless
internet
7
(29.2%)
3
(50.0%)
5
(29.4%)
0
(0.0%)
15
(30.0%)
Carpeting/other
floor covering
15
(62.5%)
3
(50.0%)
9
(52.9%)
0
(0.0%)
27
(54.0%)
Improvements
to other areas
(specified)
Improved
shelving
Building
services
upgrade
- 139 -
Refurbishment
of existing
Replacement
– on site
Replacement
– new site
Yes,
unstated
Total
Painting
17
(70.8%)
3
(50.0%)
8
(47.1%)
0
(0.0%)
28
(56.0%)
Building
materials –
external
cladding
3
(12.5%)
3
(50.0%)
6
(35.3%)
0
(0.0%)
12
(24.0%)
Heating
6
(25.0%)
3
(50.0%)
6
(35.3%)
0
(0.0%)
15
(30.0%)
Air-conditioning
7
(29.2%)
3
(50.0%)
7
(41.2%)
0
(0.0%)
17
(34.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(16.7%)
5
(29.4%)
2
(66.7
8
(16.0%)
Other works
(specified)
This table excludes wholly new buildings
Other improvements planned to libraries include the addition of:
ƒ
Cafes.
ƒ
Council customer service centre.
ƒ
Meeting rooms.
ƒ
Storage.
ƒ
Improvements to allow use as part of a multipurpose community centre.
ƒ
Improvements to provide for joint use (e.g. connection to an adjoining
school).
One library was investigating a Public Private Partnership (PPP) style site
redevelopment, whereby residential or commercial offices would be included
in part of the site redevelopment contributing towards the cost of the library.
7.6 Delivery
Local Government Authorities were asked to identify if planned new
buildings would be collocated or joint use. A number of LGAs also provided
this information for replacement buildings, where an existing library is to be
removed to a new site (Table 7.9).
Table 7.9: Collocated or joint-use facilities planned (Q.7)
Joint-use
Collocated
Both joint-use
& collocated
Neither
Not
stated
Total
New building
2
(10.5%)
11
(57.9%)
1
(5.3%)
4
(21.1%)
1
(5.3%)
19
(100%)
Replacement
– new site
1
(5.9%)
13
(76.5%)
0
(0.0%)
3
(17.6%)
0
(0.0%)
17
(100%)
Total
3
(8.3%)
24
(66.7%)
1
(2.8%)
7
(19.4%)
1
(2.8%)
36
(100%)
Almost three-quarters (73.7%) of new libraries will be delivered in either
collocated or joint-use form. This is a substantially higher proportion than
the 52.3% of existing libraries which are collocated or integrated with other
- 140 -
types of facilities or services; 10.5% of new libraries are to be joint-use
facilities, compared to 9.8% of existing library buildings. A similar pattern is
evident in plans for relocated libraries, where 82.4% will be either joint-use
or collocated.
LGAs were also asked to indicate the type of facility or service with which the
new library would be collocated or jointly used; some were yet to be
determined.
Joint-users identified were:
ƒ
Childcare Centre/Preschool.
ƒ
Community centre.
ƒ
Secondary college library.
ƒ
Council offices.
Collocated services identified were:
ƒ
Schools.
ƒ
Community centre, hall, meeting rooms.
ƒ
Medical services including Maternal and Child Health Service, consulting
rooms, State dental service.
ƒ
Children’s service such as kindergartens, pre-school, childcare, toy
library.
ƒ
Council services including community facilities, youth services, customer
service, art gallery, cultural facilities, community technology hub.
ƒ
Leisure centre/recreation facilities such as a swimming pool,
gymnasium.
ƒ
Cafe.
ƒ
Retail.
ƒ
Community groups such as historical societies.
7.7 Locational characteristics
Library services were asked to indicate the proximity of new buildings to a
variety of community facilities and services. The proximity of existing
buildings is considered in Section 5. Analysis of this data, identified in Table
7.10, indicates:
ƒ
No planned libraries are to be located within a shopping centre. Around
73.7% will, however, be located adjacent to either a shopping centre,
main street or shopping/business precinct.
ƒ
Just 21.1% will be adjacent to public transport; 68.4% are located within
400m of either a bus stop or train station. Most (78.9%) will have
adjacent car parking.
ƒ
Just 10.5% would be located near Council’s administrative precinct.
However, there appears to be a trend to locate libraries with or near other
Council infrastructure. Almost one-half (42.1%) would be located within
or adjacent to other cultural facilities, and 57.9% would be within or
adjacent to cultural or recreational facilities.
- 141 -
Table 7.10: Locational characteristics of new buildings planned
Within
building
Adjacent
Within
400m
Not
applicable
Branch
did not
complete
the
question
Shopping
centre
0
(0.0%)
5
(26.3%)
6
(31.6%)
5
(26.3%)
3
(15.8%)
19
100%)
Shopping
business/
precinct
0
(0.0%)
7
(36.8%)
7
(36.8%)
2
(10.5%)
3
(15.8%)
19
100%)
Main street
0
(0.0%)
8
(42.1%)
6
(31.6%)
2
(10.5%)
3
(15.8%)
19
100%)
2
(10.5%)
0
(0.0%)
2
(10.5%)
10
(52.6%)
5
(26.3%)
19
100%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(21.1%)
6
(31.6%)
4
(21.1%)
5
(26.3%)
19
100%)
Cultural
facilities
5
(26.3%)
3
(15.8%)
2
(10.5%)
5
(26.3%)
4
(21.1%)
19
100%)
Eating
facilities
2
(10.5%)
3
(15.8%)
8
(42.1%)
1
(5.3%)
5
(26.3%)
19
100%)
Recreation/
sporting
facility
0
(0.0%)
5
(26.3%)
5
(26.3%)
3
(15.8%)
6
(31.6%)
19
100%)
Parks and
gardens
0
(0.0%)
3
(15.8%)
8
(42.1%)
4
(21.1%)
4
(21.1%)
19
100%)
Bus stop
0
(0.0%)
4
(21.1%)
9
(47.4%)
2
(10.5%)
4
(21.1%)
19
100%)
Train station
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
4
(21.1%)
8
(42.1%)
7
(36.8%)
19
100%)
Car parking
0
(0.0%)
15
(78.9%)
1
(5.3%)
1
(5.3%)
2
(10.5%)
19
100%)
Location
Council
administration
precinct
School
- 142 -
Total
8. LIBRARY SERVICE AUDITS
8.1 Introduction
One of the key outcomes of the audit is individual library service audit
reports for each Local Government Authority in Victoria. A number of
general observations have been made from the preparation of these reports.
It is stressed that the conclusions drawn below are observations and have
not been statistically tested against the audit database.
In preparing the individual LGA reports:
ƒ
Value judgements have been avoided. Findings have only been reported
in relation to Victorian averages. Value judgements do, however, arise in
determining what is ‘significantly’ high or just ‘high’, for instance.
Consistency in relation to the use of these terms has been achieved
through the use of a quality control process.
ƒ
When interpreting the ratings of individual branches in the reports, it is
important to note the ratings were prepared internally by branch
librarians and represent subjective opinion only. These opinions may or
may not reflect the views of the library service manager who has
responsibility for management of the building and strategic decisions
about its future.
ƒ
Reference to Victorian and, in some cases, library service comparisons
have been included where they have been felt to be relevant. Such
comparisons have not been used when assessing survey respondent
ratings of building quality, because of its complexity and the possible
misleading interpretation arising (for instance, 66% of all libraries in an
LGA being excellent compared to only 33% of those in the State
(66% representing two out of three libraries)). Reference to the graphs
presented in the reports is considered to provide a much clearer
representation of the position of a library vis-a-vis other LGAs in the
State.
ƒ
We feel it is not possible to draw from the analysis any LGA-specific
recommendations (such as ‘X library needs rationalisation’) due to all the
unknown local factors which may impinge on this type of decision.
A number of issues have arisen with the data, as noted:
ƒ
The proportion of ‘non-resident membership’ in an LGA has been
reversed in some cases (where the level was extremely high, e.g. over
90%) as we have assumed this was done in error.
ƒ
The ‘functional areas’ GFA data (i.e. collection areas, reading and study
areas, etc.) appears in a number of cases to have been entered in error,
as the sum of all functional areas exceeds the total GFA of the branch. It
is likely that such errors have arisen due to manual room measurement
and approximations being made. It is also acknowledged that there may
be some crossover of area usage, and total GFA excluded stairs, lifts, etc.
This has been noted in the analysis.
ƒ
Limited use has been made of the capital expenditure data because the
data supplied in the audit is often incomplete and it also varies
significantly year by year.
- 143 -
ƒ
Note that where the analysis refers to the ‘Victorian average’ or ‘State
average’, this only represents the average of responding Victorian LGAs.
While all but four LGAs completed the audit, the response rate to
individual questions varies notably.
ƒ
The service-based benchmarks have been compiled based on a Relative
Area Factor (RAF) of 200%, to be in line with People places methodology.
However, as discussed in Section 9, the actual core areas of libraries in
Victoria exceed the 200% benchmark established by People places.
8.2 Observations
The following observations have been made from the individual LGA library
service audit reports:
ƒ
The surveys were nearly always well filled out by those LGAs that
responded.
ƒ
With rare exception, there is substantial ongoing effort and expenditure
being put into maintenance and upgrading of the standard provision of
libraries to communities.
ƒ
Newer libraries are better planned in terms of accessibility of location and
functional space.
ƒ
Older libraries, particularly those built pre-1940, are least likely to
comply with codes and regulations, and the newest libraries are most
likely to comply with codes and regulations.
ƒ
It appears that compliance with codes and regulations is generally higher
among those LGAs with relatively high maintenance expenditure.
ƒ
There is vast variation in the proportional space allocation of functional
areas, even in newer libraries.
ƒ
Some of the older (and particularly smaller) libraries have virtually all of
their space dedicated to collection areas.
ƒ
Many older libraries have low proportions of floorspace for staff areas
compared to the Victorian average, and some have none.
ƒ
There is a tendency to much larger libraries, generally over 1,000 sq m,
and up to 3,500 sq m, in newer areas.
ƒ
There are very high numbers of smaller libraries still serving rural areas.
ƒ
Existing and planned investment in library infrastructure, and in many
cases maintenance, is often lower than average in the rural areas.
ƒ
Some of the older libraries (even those built in the 1980s) are incurring
high maintenance costs.
ƒ
There is vast variation in the cost of utilities to libraries. Many libraries
have not undertaken energy audits.
ƒ
There are quite a large number of libraries where compliance with fire
rating, disability and OH&S is not known or not achieved. The purpose of
the BCA audit does not always appear to be understood.
ƒ
Wheelchair accessibility in all respects is generally the exception rather
than the rule. Wheelchair accessibility (particularly wheelchair accessible
toilets and adequate aisle widths between shelving) is less compliant in
older libraries. There is often no one library branch that is wheelchair
accessible in all respects.
- 144 -
ƒ
Libraries in traditional main street foci often have inadequate parking,
and good accessibility to community foci and facilities could be
considered a trade-off against inadequate parking.
ƒ
There is an increasing trend in metropolitan areas towards privately
owned libraries, especially collocation with private businesses, e.g.
shopping centres.
ƒ
Libraries collocating with schools appear to be less accessible to
traditional foci such as main streets and shopping precincts.
ƒ
Collocation of newer libraries is very common; it tends to be the original
library buildings that are freestanding, however, these are often in
Council administration precincts.
ƒ
Collocated libraries appear more likely to have access to community
meeting space.
A detailed data set has been made available to each LGA, from which further
detailed analysis can be undertaken.
- 145 -
9. BENCHMARKING LIBRARY SERVICE PROVISION
9.1 Overview
This section develops a benchmark of library provision for Victoria. It
overviews the limitations of the audit methodology in this regard; applies
both service-based and population-based benchmarks, overall and by library
service/LGA; and suggests a planning benchmark for Victoria.
9.2 People places benchmarks
People places details two methodologies for determining the need for and
resultant size of a new or expanded library building:
ƒ
a service-based benchmark; and
ƒ
a population-based benchmark.
The report suggests that both measures should be used to provide a range of
upper and lower gross floor area sizes. Such a range provides flexibility in
meeting local needs.
The service-based benchmark is based on the space required to house the
branches’ collection, i.e. books, journals, electronic resources, etc., and the
space needed to provide the range of services which it incorporates, i.e.
reading areas. Service requirements are translated into a floor area for each
functional area and used cumulatively to determine the total GFA required.
The measure developed by People places is derived from their research into
the relative areas within existing public libraries.
The population-based benchmark is based on meeting the requirements of
the number of people who have access to a library service. The benchmark
was derived from the standards set out in The planning and design of public
library buildings (State Library of New South Wales 1995).
9.3 Testing People places functional area size guide
It was noted above that People places identified six broad types of core
functional areas in public libraries. The relative area dedicated to each of
these core functional areas is integral to determining the required size of a
library based on the service-based benchmark approach. This process
derives from a simple concept – that library space needs are based on a level
of service provision requiring a range of materials and functional areas
necessary to serve the community adequately; and that each space has an
identifiable spatial requirement and, to a large extent, all of the services are
interrelated. The range of functional areas within Victorian libraries are
discussed in Section 3.3.4.
People places subsequently provides a functional area comparison table
which can act as a size guide for public libraries to determine the relative
allocation of floorspace between the core functional areas. This is referred to
in People places as the Relative Area Factor (RAF). It might be noted that
floorspace provision of the above specialist service areas was not collected in
the audit due to the practical difficulties faced by branches in measuring
numerous small areas, and hence the analysis applies only to the six core
functional areas (ore the ‘Core Relative Area Factor’ in determining library
size, as identified in People places).
- 146 -
The floorspace areas derived from the audit have been tabulated and the
proportional allocation of these compared with those in People places is
provided in Table 9.1. The allocations in People places were derived from
research carried out into the relative areas of existing public libraries in New
South Wales. They are based on the overall size of the collection area as the
base, which has a direct impact on the space required for the other library
services.
Table 9.1: Comparison of core functional areas
Average
floorspace by
functional area –
Victorian public
libraries
Current
proportional
distribution –
Victorian public
libraries
Base Area
100%
239 sq m
100%
Reading and study
areas
30%
103 sq m
43%
Resource areas
15%
56 sq m
23%
Staff areas
35%
84 sq m
35%
Amenities
20%
86 sq m
36%
200%
568 sq m
237%
Functional area
Collection areas
Total
(Core Relative Area
Factor)
People places
guide
The most significant observation arising from the table is that other
functional areas are over-represented relative to the area of collection areas
(or conversely, it could be said that collection areas are under-represented
relative to other types of functional areas). This over-representation occurs in
all areas other than staff areas, which sit at the recommended 35% of the
collection areas space. Reading and study areas have 43% of the
recommended space compared to 30% in People places. Resource areas have
23% compared to a recommended 15%, and amenities have 36% compared
to a recommended 20%.
Accordingly, an issue for further consideration is whether collection areas
are under-represented in Victoria, or whether the other functional areas are
relatively over-represented.
The average functional spaces in the above table suggest that Victorian
public libraries conform to the trend outlined by Bundy (2006) (and
discussed in Section 3.3), whereby libraries reverse the desired floorspace
allocation ratio due to lack of space. Bundy noted that library users, like
shoppers, need 60% of the library’s floorspace to browse comfortably, leaving
40% of space for shelving and other fittings. The People places standards
operate on a 50% split.
The space standard on which the People places benchmark is based is
referred to as the Target Collection Factor (TCF). The TCF for Victoria is
calculated in Table 9.2.
- 147 -
Table 9.2: Victorian Target Collection Factor (TCF)
Number of
items in
Victoria
% on
loan
Items on
shelf
Size (sq m)
indicated by
standard
7,451,709
24.25%
5,644,670
56,447
428,769
24.25%
324,793
3,248
10 titles
per sq m
122,225
0.0%
122,225
12,223
Non-print
material
(tapes, CDs,
videos, DVDs,
etc.)
100
recordings
per sq m
675,134
46.36%
362,142
3,621
Virtual and
digital
resources
(number of
public
terminals)
1 terminal
to 5 sq m
2,694
0.0%
2,694
13,470
Space
standard
Books on
shelves
(number of
volumes)
‘Other’ Items
(e.g. local
history,
reference
books)
Periodicals
(number of
titles)*
100 books
per sq m
100 books
per sq m
Total Target Collection Factor (TCF)
89,009
* Nine library services provided incomplete data
The Audit identifies the total collection floorspace which exists in libraries in
Victoria equals 53,999 sq m. It is noted that this is drawn from the 39 LGAs
which responded, and that the TCF for these 39 LGAs is 74,651.
The size of collection areas in Victoria is substantially smaller (72.3%) than
what is provided for by the space standard for collections in People places.
People places is designed for new libraries, which have more open designs,
and a vertically reduced number of shelving bays. In calculating TCF, People
places assumes a set of shelf and aisle dimensions which provides for
approximately 100 volumes per sq m of floor area7. Many existing libraries
will not satisfy this standard. It is noted that the reduction of bays from five
to four in height reduces potential storage space by 20%, which accounts for
most of the discrepancy between the Victorian provision and the standard.
7 The space allocation for the materials collection is based on: Shelving an average of
30 volumes per shelf with a standard shelf 900 mm long; Bays of shelving spaced at
1,500 mm clear width between aisles; Bays four shelves high and ranging to six shelves
long, i.e. 5,400 mm. This configuration gives a module of 14.49 sq m containing on average
1,440 volumes which equates to approximately 100 volumes per square metre of floor area.
(Library Council of New South Wales 2005:65)
- 148 -
Further, it is noted that the amount of resources on loan in Victoria is lower
than the rate assumed by People places. People places identifies an average
of 30–35% of a collection will be on loan at any one time. The Audit identifies
a rate for print resources of approximately 25%. The Strategic Asset Audit of
Victorian Public Libraries (J.L. Management Services 2006) identified that the
Victorian mean was 23.7%. Application of the People places loan rates to the
Victorian situation would reduce the TCF to 67,260.
9.4 Testing People places space standards
The People places service-based benchmark has been applied to each library
service in Victoria (assuming an RAF of 200%, rather than the actual RAF
rate identified above) (Table 9.3).
Table 9.3: Relationship between floorspace provision and benchmarks
– library services
Service-based
benchmark
Difference (sq m)
LGAs
Population-based
benchmark
%
LGAs
%
-5,001>
4
9.1%
5
11.4%
-2,001 – -5,000
2
4.5%
11
25.0%
-1,001 – -2,000
8
18.2%
11
25.0%
-501 – -1,000
3
6.8%
4
9.1%
-101 – -500
4
9.1%
4
9.1%
-1 – -100
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Equal
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1–100
3
6.8%
0
0.0%
101–500
2
4.5%
6
13.6%
501–1,000
2
4.5%
0
0.0%
1,001–2,000
8
18.2%
1
2.3%
2,001–5,000
5
11.4%
0
0.0%
5,001>
1
2.3%
0
0.0%
Not available
2
4.5%
2
4.5%
44
100%
44
100%
Total
People places assumes that all adequately sized libraries should fall between
the range provided by the service- and population-based benchmarks, i.e. all
libraries should have a GFA lower than the population-based benchmark.
This is generally the case, however, seven LGAs have a floorspace provision
greater than the population benchmark suggests is required (i.e. they are
relatively oversupplied). The provision in some LGAs is, however,
significantly lower than the population benchmark.
- 149 -
In turn, the service-based benchmark can be regarded as a minimum
recommended level of adequate provision. The proportion of LGAs meeting or
falling short of the service-based benchmark is evenly split (both are 47.7%).
It is of concern that nearly half of LGAs do not meet the People places
minimum standard of provision.
Information on which to compile a service-based benchmark for Victorian
LGAs is not available. Alternatively, a comparison of the ratio of floorspace to
population (sq m per 1,000 people) has been calculated as a further measure
to gauge the extent of any shortfall of LGA floorspace.
A generally accepted town planning benchmark recommends that between
28 to 43 sq m of public floorspace should be provided per 1,000 people (with
a minimum amount required per building). This is referred to as the Building
Area Factor (BAF) in People places. One branch library is generally planned
for every 15,000 to 30,000 people. People places rates range between 28 and
42 sq m per 1,000 people, depending on the population size served:
ƒ
Less than 20,000 – provide 42 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
Between 20,001–35,000 – provide 39 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
Between 35,001–65,000 – provide 35 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
Between 65,001–100,000 – provide 31 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
More than 100,000 – provide 28 sq m per 1,000 population.
For comparative purposes, Queensland uses the following rates:
ƒ
Up to 15,000 – between 43–41 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
15,000–50,000 – between 41–37 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
More than 50,000 – between 37–35 sq m per 1,000 population.
The Audit has identified that the current provision of floorspace in Victoria is
28 sq m per 1,000 people. This equates to the minimum in People places,
but is less than the town planning standard. If it was assumed all LGAs
exactly met their populations needs, in line with the People places BAF
amounts, the average rate of floorspace provision in Victoria would be
30 sq m per 1,000 people. It is also noted that this is the status now, but
does not account for ongoing population growth.
Section 7.5.1 of this report identified plans for an additional 37,363 sq m of
floorspace throughout Victoria. Incorporation of this additional floorspace
increases the average rate of provision of floorspace in Victoria to 36 sq m
per 1,000 people8. This is an encouraging sign of investment.
Most LGAs (58.5%) and branches (59.1%) match or exceed the current
average rate of provision in Victoria. The average rate of provision among
LGAs is 35 sq m and the median value is 30 sq m per 1,000 people; 56.8% of
LGAs currently provide 35 or more sq m per 1,000 of population.
Further analysis reveals a somewhat more complex arrangement of library
service provision. At the library service level, it is noted that while the rate of
provision may in some cases appear adequate compared to the Victorian
average, the level of supply at the service’s primary LGA may not be.
8 Note: some of this additional floorspace involves replacement of existing building stock, so
the figure should be regarded as an estimate only.
- 150 -
As identified in Table 9.4, the rate of floorspace provision is broadly affected
by the size of the resident population. Some small LGAs have a very high
rate of provision. A number of regional population centres have a lower rate
of floorspace provision than would be expected, given the regional demands
their services may face.
Table 9.4: Testing the People places Building Area Factor
LGA
population
<10,000
<20,000
20,001–
35,000
35,001–
65,000
65,001–
100,000
100,000>
Median of
LGAs
46 sq m
43 sq m
44 sq m
29 sq m
36 sq m
25 sq m
Average of
LGAs
48 sq m
43 sq m
40 sq m
29 sq m
38 sq m
25 sq m
Sq m per
1,000
people
44 sq m
39 sq m
39 sq m
29 sq m
35 sq m
25 sq m
People
places
guide
42 sq m
42 sq m
39 sq m
35 sq m
31 sq m
28 sq m
Proportion
of LGAs in
State of
this size
13.5%
29.7%
13.5%
12.2%
14.9%
29.7%
Proportion
of LGAs not
meeting
BAF
20.0%
36.4%
40.0%
77.8%
27.3%
68.2%
Data within the above table reflects the general approach of the benchmarks
cited, whereby the standard of provision reflects the population size served.
It can be concluded that:
ƒ
Provision in small LGAs (<10,000 population) and LGAs between 65,000–
100,000 people exceeds the benchmark.
ƒ
Provision in LGAs between 20,001–35,000 people matches the
benchmark.
ƒ
All other LGA sizes fall short of the benchmark.
- 151 -
10. CONCLUSION
10.1 A planning benchmark for Victoria
A range of planning benchmarks have been discussed and applied in the
previous section. While notable variation within the State makes it difficult
to generalise, in comparison to these planning benchmarks it is clear that
the current level of floorspace provision in Victoria is less than adequate.
Nearly half of library services do not meet the People places minimum
standard of provision. Overall, the current provision of floorspace in Victoria
is 28 sq m per 1,000 people, which is less than minimum required which
has been estimated to currently be 30 sq m per 1,000 people.
The Audit has broadly confirmed the accuracy of the planning benchmarks
utilised by People places and has not revealed any information which
suggests they should be altered. A number of discrepancies do exist, and
have been noted in the analysis.
We have, however, paid less attention to service-based and population-based
benchmarks outlined in People places in recommending a State benchmark,
as the testing undertaken above suggests they are more appropriate for
assessing and designing new buildings, rather than retrospectively assessing
existing buildings. For example, a number of the design standards upon
which the service-based benchmark is predicated are not appropriate when
applied to a building designed 20 years previously.
10.2 Recommended strategies
We recommend instead that planning standards based upon the Building
Area Factor in People places be relied upon. It is recommended that these be
adopted for use in Victoria, namely:
ƒ
Less than 20,000 – provide 42 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
Between 20,001–35,000 – provide 39 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
Between 35,001–65,000 – provide 35 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
Between 65,001–100,000 – provide 31 sq m per 1,000 population.
ƒ
More than 100,000 – provide 28 sq m per 1,000 population.
We also recommend that a State benchmark of 30 sq m per 1,000 population
be adopted as a target.
It may also prove appropriate to develop a rural and a metropolitan
benchmark, and it is further suggested that consideration be given to this at
a later date.
These standards should form the starting point for determining what need
might be present in a community. They must be informed by other factors
about local need.
Strategies for improving provision in Victoria should initially aim for parity
with the current State average of 28 sq m per 1,000 population in those
LGAs which fall short of this target. We regard this as an equitable
approach. This will involve the provision of an additional 19,039 sq m of
gross floorspace.
- 152 -
In the longer term, strategies should seek to achieve a target of 30 sq m per
1,000 population, and meeting the People places BAF as relevant to an LGAs
population size. This will involve the provision of an additional 24,184 sq m
of gross floorspace (or 5,145 sq m more than the initial target). These figures
do not include an allowance for projected population growth.
The Audit results also point to a need for a range of capacity building
activities to be undertaken. Topics identified by the audit include education
on:
ƒ
Internal library planning, e.g. internal layout and design and functional
space allocation. We suggest this involve activities which propagate the
concepts established within People places.
ƒ
The purpose of the Building Code of Australia and other applicable
building codes and regulations. Priority attention should be given to
improving disability access compliance, given the critical role of libraries
in community building and fostering social inclusion. An early target is
for each LGA to have one branch which is fully accessible in all respects.
This is not currently the case in a number of LGAs.
ƒ
The value in energy audits, their process, and the savings which can be
achieved in utility costs.
Further detailed guidance could be provided to library services either
through documentation or seminars. Documentation developed need not be
a formal report, but rather be in the form of a circular or an article in a
magazine should be considered.
The move towards the concept of libraries as and within community hubs
and learning centres should be further promoted and facilitated. A useful
starting point would be to undertake a more detailed review of existing
collocated libraries which act as hubs, to identify their advantages and
disadvantages, any barriers to their development, implementation and
management, and seek successful ways to promote their implementation.
This would examine not just how hubs can be achieved in new libraries, but
more importantly given the sectors funding constraints, how existing
infrastructure can be adapted to the task. Initial guidance may be found in
some of the case studies contained in of this report.
It is further recommended that, at a State level, this audit be undertaken
every two years in order to monitor progress and change in Victoria’s library
building stock. Internal updates of the individual LGA audit reports should
be prepared by each library service on an annual basis.
- 153 -
REFERENCES
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2005), Public Libraries 2003–2004,
Cat. No. 8561.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra. Retrieved 14
July 2008 from www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/subscriber.nsf/
0/DD3BEA2E4FA5DA11CA256FF100787DE0/$File/85610_2003-04.pdf
Audit Commission (United Kingdom) (2002), AC Knowledge – Learning from
Audit, Inspection and Research: Building Better Library Services, Audit
Commission, London. Retrieved 14 October 2008 from www.auditcommission.gov.uk/reports/NATIONAL-REPORT.asp?CategoryID
=&ProdID=9D0A0DD1-3BF9-4c52-9112-67D520E7C0AB
Australian Library and Information Association (2002), Statement on jointuse libraries, Australian Library and Information Association, Canberra.
Retrieved 24 July 2008 from alia.org.au/policies/joint-use.html
BBC Consulting Planners (2007), New South Wales Audit of Public Library
Buildings, Public Libraries, Public Libraries New South Wales – Country,
State Library of New South Wales, Sydney.
Bryson, J, Usherwood, B, and Proctor, R (2003), Libraries Must Also Be
Buildings? New Library Impact Study, Centre for Public Libraries and
Information in Society and Department of Information Studies, University of
Sheffield, for re:source: The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries,
United Kingdom. Retrieved 7 October 2008 from www.sheffield.ac.uk/is/
research/centres/cplis/research/index.html
Bundy, A (2003), Best investment: The modern public library as social capital,
paper presented at the AGM of Friends of Libraries Australia (FOLA) Altona,
Victoria, 27 August 2003. Retrieved 15 July 2008 from
www.library.unisa.edu.au/about/papers/best-investment.pdf
Bundy, A (2003b), Joint-use libraries – the ultimate form of cooperation,
chapter contributed to ‘Planning the modern public library building’, edited
by Gerard McCabe and James Kennedy and published by Libraries
Unlimited, Connecticut, USA. Retrieved 24 July 2008 from
www.library.unisa.edu.au/about/papers/jointuse.pdf
Bundy, A (2004), Places of connection: New public and academic library
buildings in Australia and New Zealand, paper for Libraries Building
Conference Bournemouth UK 5–6 February 2004, University of South
Australia. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.library.unisa.edu.au/about/papers/Places-of-connection.pdf
Bundy, A (2006), A place with space: How does your library rate?,
presentation to a forum of South Australian Friends of Libraries, State
Library of South Australia, 6 April 2006. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.fola.org.au/pdfs/placewithspace.pdf
Bundy, A (2006b), Public libraries: Unique, ubiquitous, undersold,
underfunded, presentation to the fifth Annual Community Advisory
Committee and Friends of the Library forum, West Gippsland Regional
Library Corporation, Drouin, Victoria, 9 May 2006. Retrieved 15 July 2008
from www.fola.org.au/pdfs/uuuu.pdf
- 154 -
CABE (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment) & Resource:
The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries (2003), Better Public
Libraries, The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries, United
Kingdom. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.cabe.org.uk/default.aspx?contentitemid=527
Cox, E (2000), A safe place to go: Libraries and Social Capital, University of
Technology Sydney for the Public Libraries Branch of the State Library of
New South Wales, State Library of New South Wales, Sydney. Retrieved 14
July 2008 from
www.sl.nsw.gov.au/services/public_libraries/docs/safe_place.pdf
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (2003), Framework for the Future:
Libraries, Learning and Information in the Next Decade, Department for
Culture, Media and Sport, United Kingdom. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/publications/4505.aspx
Department of Planning and Community Development (2008), Living
Libraries Program 2008, Department of Planning and Community
Development, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.grants.dvc.vic.gov.au/Web18/rwpgslib.nsf/GraphicFiles/ProgramGuid
elines_LivingLibraries2008.pdf/$file/ProgramGuidelines_LivingLibraries2008
.pdf
dmA Planning and Management Services and Southern Ontario Library
Service (2007), The Library’s Contribution to Your Community: a Resource
Manual, Southern Ontario Library Service, Canada.
J.L. Management Services (2006), Strategic Asset Audit of Victorian Public
Libraries, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 15 July 2008 from
www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/strategic_audit_report.pdf
Johnstone, L (1999), ‘Public libraries and shopping centres’, Australasian
Public Libraries and Information Services, Vol 12 No 1, March 1999, Auslib
Press, South Australia. Retrieved 17 October 2008 from
search.informit.com.au/fullText;dn=984888054732316;res=IELHSS
Jones, D (1997), ‘Time capsules or time machines? Challenges for public
library buildings’, The Australian Library Journal, Volume 46, Issue 4,
November 1997, Australian Library and Information Association, Canberra.
Jones, D (2001), ‘People Places: Public library buildings for the new
millennium’, Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services, Vol 14
No 3, September 2001, Auslib Press, South Australia.
Jones, D (2003), ‘Is your building future-proof?’, inCITE, October 2003,
Australian Library and Information Association, Canberra. Retrieved 15
October 2008 from alia.org.au/publishing/incite/2003/10/futureproof.html
Jones, D (2004), ‘Critical issues in public library planning: the New South
Wales experience’, The Australian Library Journal, Volume 53, Issue 4,
November 2004, Australian Library and Information Association, Canberra.
Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.alia.org.au/publishing/alj/53.4/full.text/jones.html
Library Board of Victoria (2005), Libraries Building Communities: Executive
Summary, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/lbc_execsumm.pdf
- 155 -
Library Board of Victoria (2005), Libraries Building Communities: Report 1:
Setting the Scene, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July
2008 from www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/lbc_report1.pdf
Library Board of Victoria (2005), Libraries Building Communities: Report 2:
Logging the Benefits, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July
2008 from www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/lbc_report2.pdf
Library Board of Victoria (2005), Libraries Building Communities: Report 3:
Bridging the Gaps, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July
2008 from www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/lbc_report3.pdf.
Library Board of Victoria (2005), Libraries Building Communities: Report 4:
Showcasing the Best, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July
2008 from www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/lbc_report4.pdf.
Library Board of Victoria (2006), Libraries Building Communities: Library User
Census and Survey Project 2006, Report 1: Statewide Analysis and
Comparisons, Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne. Retrieved 14 July 2008
from www.slv.vic.gov.au/pdfs/aboutus/publications/lbcreport1_2006.pdf
Library Board of Victoria (2006), Libraries Building Communities: Library User
Census and Survey Project 2006, Report 2: Library Services Data and Reports,
Library Board of Victoria, Melbourne.
Library Board of Victoria and Victorian Public Library Network (2006),
Framework for Collaborative Action, Revised April 2006, Library Board of
Victoria, Melbourne.
Library Council of New South Wales (2000), People places: A guide for public
library buildings in New South Wales, Library Council of New South Wales,
Sydney.
Library Council of New South Wales (2005), People places: A guide for public
library buildings in New South Wales, 2nd edition, Library Council of New
South Wales, Sydney. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.sl.nsw.gov.au/services/public_libraries/library_mgt/lib_management_
docs/peopleplaces_2ndedition.pdf
McCallum I. and Quinn S. (2001), APLN: The will - or the last testament?,
Final report to the Council of Australian State Libraries, Libraries Alive! Pty
Ltd. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.pla.org.au/documents/minutes/R7nov01.pdf
NSLA (National and State Libraries Australasia) (2007), Annual Public
Libraries Statistical Report 2006–2007, NSLA, Queensland. Retrieved 14 July
2008 from www.nsla.org.au/publications/statistics/2006/pdf/NSLA.
Statistics-20061102-Australian.Public.Library.Statistics.Report.2005.
2006.pdf
Standards Australia (2003), AS 1428 Design for access and mobility,
Standards Australia. Retrieved 7 October 2008 from
www.saiglobal.com/shop/Script/Details.asp?DocN=AS186293820419
State Library of New South Wales (1995), The planning and design of public
library buildings, Revised edition, State Library of New South Wales, Sydney.
Worpole, K (2005), 21st Century Libraries: Changing Forms, Changing
Futures, Building Futures, United Kingdom. Retrieved 14 July 2008 from
www.buildingfutures.org.uk/assets/downloads/pdffile_31.pdf
- 156 -
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Survey tool
SURVEY OF PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS IN VICTORIA
Name of Library Service
Name of Local Government Authority
Name of Library Branch
Question
I.
Response
Section I. of the survey is to be completed at the LOCAL GOVERNMENT
LEVEL (not at the Branch level). Survey responses will then be
aggregated (if necessary) in order to provide data at the Library Service
level.
Local Government Authority Information
A.
1
2a
2b
3
B.
4
Assessment of Population Based Benchmark of Library
Provision
How many people live in the Local Government Authority?
Explanatory Notes
This section is to be completed once per Local Government Authority
Data provided from DVC Annual Survey
The population is the total number of people living within the Local
Government Area. The source is the DVC Annual Survey latest Estimate
Resident Population (ERP).
What is the total library membership in the Local Government
Authority?
How many of these members live in the Local Government
Authority?
____________________________
____________________________
The number of library service members whose residential address is not
within a Local Government Area covered by the Library Service.
If the number of ‘non-resident members’ is significant, please
briefly state any reasons for this -
____________________________
Not considered significant
For example, proximity to shops, employment nodes, etc.
Assessment of Service Based Benchmark of Library
Provision
Please give the total numbers for each of the following in
your Library Service (over all branches) -
This section is to be completed once per Local Government Authority
a
Number of books on shelves
Data provided from Collections audit
b
Number of periodicals (titles)
Data provided from Collections audit
This is the number of titles only.
c
Data provided from Collections audit
Data provided from Collections audit
This includes for example tapes, CD’s, CD-Roms, DVD’s etc
d
Number of non-print items
Number of public computer terminals
e
Other (please specify _____________)
Data provided from Collections audit
5a
Please estimate the percentage (%) of books on loan at any
one time
Please estimate the percentage (%) of non-print materials on
loan at any one time non-print materials
Data provided from Collections audit
5b
25 May 2007
Data provided from Collections audit
1
C.
Audit of Administration Buildings
This section is to be completed once per Local Government Authority
6a
Within this Local Government Authority, is there any off-site
floor space in other buildings, used for library purposes?
Yes
No
6b
If yes, what is this space used for and what is its’ gross floor
area?
Administration: Area (m²)________
Storage: Area (m²)___________
Other, please specify_______: Area (m²)_____
6c
Is each building leased or owned?
Leased (please specify who from:
o Not leased
o Council,
o Crown Land,
o Private Owner,
o Other, please specify ______)
Owned (please specify who by:
o Council,
o Crown Land,
o Private Owner,
o Other, please specify ______)
a. Administration
b. Storage
c. Other type of building, please specify _________________
25 May 2007
Gross floor area (GFA) is defined in Question 11.
Leased (please specify who from:
o Not leased
o Council,
o Crown Land,
o Private Owner,
o Other, please specify ______)
Owned (please specify who by:
o Council,
o Crown Land,
o Private Owner,
o Other, please specify ______)
Leased (please specify who from:
o Not leased
o Council,
o Crown Land,
o Private Owner,
o Other, please specify ______)
Owned (please specify who by:
o Council,
o Crown Land,
o Private Owner,
o Other, please specify ______)
2
D.
Planning and Development
This section is to be completed once per Local Government Authority
7a
How many new buildings are planned in the Local
Government Authority?
No new buildings planned
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
7
(i)b
For the FIRST building, when is it expected to be operational?
Less than two years
Between two and four years
More than four years time
For the FIRST building, what is the proposed additional floor
__________________
Please respond for any new building. Refurbishments and extensions of
existing buildings are dealt with in Section E of the Branch Survey.
If your LGA is the main local government funding source of a new building,
but it is not located in your LGA, please provide details in this section.
7
(i)c
space?
7
(i)d
For the FIRST building, what is the likely budget (in $) for (Please indicate to the nearest $100,000)
Capital building: $_______
Internal fit out (eg shelving etc): $_______
Total budget: $_______
This excludes budget for book stock and other resources.
7
(i)e
For the FIRST building, what is the type of facility planned?
Co-located libraries are defined as multiple services sharing a building, with
separate areas for each service. These areas need not be physically
separated by walls. Co-located libraries typically bring together other Council
related services such as the Council Chambers/offices, community centres,
arts centres, youth facilities and/or one stop shop services. More recently, colocated libraries have been developed with other government services such
as community health centres, home and community care centres,
employment services or community technology centres.
Joint use (please specify other services
______)
Co-located (please specify other services
______)
Neither
Joint-use libraries are defined as libraries where two or more distinct library
service providers serve their client group in the same building, the
governance of which is co-operatively arranged between the separate
authorities. For example, a joint use library may be developed between a
Library Service and a School to operate a library serving both high school
students and the broader community. The service is shared with pooled
funding provided by both agencies to cover the capital and recurrent costs of
the service.
25 May 2007
3
7
(i)f
For the FIRST building, what are the attributes of the planned
location of the new building? (please tick all applicable)
Within
library
building:
Adjacent
to library
building:
within
400m
of:
a shopping
centre
a shopping or
business
precinct
a main street
a Council
administration
precinct
train station
bus stop
cultural
facilities
car parking
eating
facilities
school
recreation/
sporting
facility
parks and
gardens
Other (Pls
specify _____
7
(i)g
For the FIRST building, in which suburb will the new library be
__________________
built? (If the building will be at an existing site, please write
both the suburb, and that it is an existing site.)
7
(ii)b
For the SECOND building, when is it expected to be
operational?
7
(ii)c
For the SECOND building, what is the proposed additional floor
__________________
7
(ii)d
For the SECOND building, what is the likely budget (in $) for -
Less than two years
Between two and four years
More than four years time
space?
(Please indicate to the nearest $100,000)
25 May 2007
Capital building: $_______
Internal fit out (eg shelving etc): $_______
Total budget: $_______
4
7
(ii)e
For the SECOND building, what is the type of facility planned?
7
(ii)f
Joint use (please specify other services
______)
Co-located (please specify other services
______)
Neither
For the SECOND building, what are the attributes of the
planned location of the new building? (please tick all
applicable)
Within
library
building:
Adjacent
to library
building:
within
400m
of:
a shopping
centre
a shopping or
business
precinct
a main street
a Council
administration
precinct
train station
bus stop
cultural
facilities
car parking
eating
facilities
school
recreation/
sporting
facility
parks and
gardens
Other (Pls
specify _____
7
(ii)g
For the SECOND building, in which suburb will the new library
7
(iii)b
For the THIRD building, when is it expected to be operational?
7
(iii)c
For the THIRD building, what is the proposed additional floor
__________________
__________________
be built? (If the building will be at an existing site, please
write both the suburb, and that it is an existing site.)
Less than two years
Between two and four years
More than four years time
space?
25 May 2007
5
7
(iii)d
For the THIRD building, what is the likely budget (in $) for -
(Please indicate to the nearest $100,000)
Capital building: $_______
Internal fit out (eg shelving etc): $_______
Total budget: $_______
7
(iii)e
For the THIRD building, what is the type of facility planned?
7
(iii)f
Joint use (please specify other services
______)
Co-located (please specify other services
______)
Neither
For the THIRD building, what are the attributes of the planned
location of the new building? (please tick all applicable)
Within
library
building:
Adjacent
to library
building:
within
400m
of:
a shopping
centre
a shopping or
business
precinct
a main street
a Council
administration
precinct
train station
bus stop
cultural
facilities
car parking
eating
facilities
school
recreation/
sporting
facility
parks and
gardens
Other (Pls
specify _____
7
(iii)g
For the THIRD building, in which suburb will the new library be
7
(iv)b
For the FORTH building, when is it expected to be operational?
__________________
built? (If the building will be at an existing site, please write
both the suburb, and that it is an existing site.)
25 May 2007
Less than two years
Between two and four years
More than four years time
6
7
(iv)c
7
(iv)d
7
(iv)e
For the FOURTH building, what is the proposed additional floor
__________________
space?
For the FOURTH building, what is the likely budget (in $) for -
(Please indicate to the nearest $100,000)
Capital building: $_______
Internal fit out (eg shelving etc): $_______
Total budget: $_______
For the FOURTH building, what is the type of facility planned?
7
(iv)f
Joint use (please specify other services
______)
Co-located (please specify other services
______)
Neither
For the FOURTH building, what are the attributes of the
planned location of the new building? (please tick all
applicable)
Within
library
building:
Adjacent
to library
building:
within
400m
of:
a shopping
centre
a shopping or
business
precinct
a main street
a Council
administration
precinct
train station
bus stop
cultural
facilities
car parking
eating
facilities
school
recreation/
sporting
facility
parks and
gardens
Other (Pls
specify _____
7
(iv)g
For the FOURTH building, in which suburb will the new library
be built? (If the building will be at an existing site, please
write both the suburb, and that it is an existing site.)
25 May 2007
__________________
7
7
(v)b
For the FIFTH building, when is it expected to be operational?
7
(v)c
For the FIFTH building, what is the proposed additional floor
__________________
7
(v)d
For the FIFTH building, what is the likely budget (in $) for -
(Please indicate to the nearest $100,000)
Capital building: $_______
Internal fit out (eg shelving etc): $_______
Total budget: $_______
7
(v)e
For the FIFTH building, what is the type of facility planned?
space?
7
(v)f
Less than two years
Between two and four years
More than four years time
Joint use (please specify other services
______)
Co-located (please specify other services
______)
Neither
For the FIFTH building, what are the attributes of the planned
location of the new building? (please tick all applicable)
Within
library
building:
Adjacent
to library
building:
within
400m
of:
a shopping
centre
a shopping or
business
precinct
a main street
a Council
administration
precinct
train station
bus stop
cultural
facilities
car parking
eating
facilities
school
recreation/
sporting
facility
parks and
gardens
Other (Pls
specify _____
25 May 2007
8
7
(v)g
8
For the FIFTH building, in which suburb will the new library be
__________________
built? (If the building will be at an existing site, please write
both the suburb, and that it is an existing site.)
What was the total capital expenditure budget of the Local
Government Area for the current (06/07) financial year and
for the next three years? ($)
2006/07: $________________
2007/08: $________________
2008/09: $________________
2009/10: $________________
This question is to be separately completed for each Local Government Area
which comprise the Library Service Area.
Thank you for your co-operation
25 May 2007
9
SURVEY OF PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS IN VICTORIA
Name of Library Service
Name of Local Government Authority
Name of Library Branch
Question
Response
Explanatory Notes
II.
Building Audit
This section is to be completed once per Branch Library building.
A.
Floor Space and Function
The questions in Part A are intended to obtain information on the floor
space of the library premises and the various functions provided at the
premises.
Questions one to eight are answered by the Library Service. The questions relating to your Branch building begin with question nine.
9
10
11
What are the average total operating hours per week of the
Branch Library?
On average, how many people visit the Branch library each
week?
What is the gross floor area of the branch library premises?
__________________ hours
__________________ people
(m²)___________
gross floor area means the sum of the floor area of each storey of a building
measured from the internal face of external walls, or from the internal face of
walls separating the building from any other building,
and includes:
(a) the area of a mezzanine within the storey
but EXCLUDES:
(b) any area for common vertical circulation, such as lifts and stairs, and
(c) vehicular access, loading areas, garbage and services, and
(d) plant rooms, lift towers and other areas used exclusively for mechanical
services or ducting, and
(e) car parking (including access to that car parking), and
(f) any space used for the loading or unloading of goods (including access to
it), and
(g) terraces and balconies, and
(h) void spaces.
It includes both public and staff spaces and for this survey excludes Library
Service Level administration space (both on and off-site).
If required, the conversion rate to use is: 1 square foot = 0.09290304 square
meters.
25 May 2007
10
12
What is the gross floor area of the following main functions of
the branch library (functional areas):
12a
- collection areas
(m²)___________
12b
- reading and study areas
(m²)___________
12c
- resource areas
(m²)___________
12d
- staff areas
(m²)___________
12e
- amenities areas
(m²)___________
12f
- other areas (please specify ___________)
(m²)___________
13a
Over how many levels is the branch library constructed?
_______________ levels
This includes both public and private space and excludes parking levels.
13b
How many levels are publicly accessible?
_______________ levels
Note that this does not refer to Disabled access, which is dealt with in another
question.
13c
13d
Is at least part of the branch library located on the ground
floor, with street frontage?
Does the building have lifts?
Yes
No
No
Yes, for patrons
Yes, for goods
Yes, for both patrons and goods
13e
If yes, do the lifts service all levels of the library?
Yes
No
14
14a
Does the branch library provide floor area regularly used for
the following services. Please also indicate if it is exclusive or
shared floor space.
- Children’s Storytelling Area
14b
- Young Adult Area
25 May 2007
It is acknowledged that there may be some cross over of area usage. If
possible, please allocate areas to their dominant use. Please be as accurate
as possible. If there is no specific area, please indicate with a 0.
The Gross floor area (question 11) does not have to total the areas specified
in this question (as GFA includes stairs etc).
Collections area: books on shelves, periodicals, non-print materials, toy
library, virtual and digital resources.
Reading and Study Areas: meeting areas, study areas, browsing and display
and information areas/ exhibition space, young adult area, multi-purpose
rooms (training, AV), children’s storytelling area, specialist genre collection
area, specialist rooms (eg local and family history).
Resource Areas: Returns and enquiries desk, service desk, internet
terminals, catalogues, printers, photocopiers, vending machines and
telephones.
Staff areas: back of house (eg back workrooms, lunch rooms, offices),
including staff work areas, office space and storage (for archival materials).
Amenities areas: foyer, lobby, corridors/ circulation space, public and staff
and accessible toilets, restrooms, plant equipment, storage (for maintenance
equipment) and maintenance areas.
Includes for example, bookshop, coffee shop, community services, bank
services, Council customer service, etc
This question deals with shared USES of floor space. Shared USERS of floor
space are dealt with in Questions 16 and 17.
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
11
14c
- Specialist genre collection area
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14d
- Specialist Room, Local and Family History
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14e
- Multi-Purpose Room (eg Training, AV room, community
meeting space)
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14f
- Bookshop, Coffee Shop, gift shop
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14g
- Toy Library
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14h
- Community Services, Bank Services, Council Customer
Service
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14i
- Storage area for archival materials
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14j
- Office space
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14k
- Exhibition space
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14l
- Mobile library services area
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14m
- Computer Lab/ Internet lounge or area
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
14n
- Wireless internet area
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
25 May 2007
For example, a music collection, or a specific named collection.
This includes any internal office areas which are exclusively used for the
mobile library services.
12
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
- Other: Please specify _____________
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Is it possible to divide (such as through wall partitions) multipurpose areas (for example, to separate group study/meeting
areas from the main library/quiet areas) within the branch
library?
Is the branch library co-located/ integrated with other facilities
or services?
Yes
No
Don’t have any
Yes
No, the library is freestanding
14o
- Staff lunchroom
14p
- Other: Please specify _____________
14q
15
16a
Co-located libraries are defined as multiple services sharing a building, with
separate areas for each service. These areas need not be physically
separated by walls. Co-located libraries typically bring together other Council
related services such as the Council Chambers/offices, community centres,
arts centres, youth facilities and/or one stop shop services. More recently, colocated libraries have been developed with other government services such
as community health centres, home and community care centres,
employment services or community technology centres.
Co-located services which are located in separate buildings or on separate
adjacent sites are examined in question 35.
16b
If yes, what other uses are in the same building?
(please tick all applicable)
16c
If the branch library is co-located, what percentage of the
overall complex do you estimate is dedicated to library
functions?
25 May 2007
Private sector businesses (eg shops)
Child care
Community centre
Youth centre
Community health centre
Council one stop shop services
Other Local Government service (please
specify ___)
Other State Government service (please specify
___)
Other Federal Government service (please
specify ___)
Other, please specify ________
_________ %
13
17a
Is the branch library either a joint-use library or a multi-use
facility?
Yes
No
Where the library has two or more distinct groups of users served by the one
library
Joint-use libraries are defined as libraries where two or more distinct library
service providers serve their client group in the same building, the
governance of which is co-operatively arranged between the separate
authorities. For example, a joint use library may be developed between a
Library Service and a School to operate a library serving both high school
students and the broader community. The service is shared with pooled
funding provided by both agencies to cover the capital and recurrent costs of
the service.
17b
If yes, what are the partner institutions or the other facilities?
Please specify ________________________
18a
Who OWNS the branch library building -
18b
Who is the branch library building LEASED by -
Council,
Crown Land,
Private Owner,
Library Service
Other, please specify ______)
Not leased
Council,
Crown Land,
Private Owner,
Library Service
Other, please specify ______)
Please provide information on both (i) who leases the building and (ii) who it
is leased from. For example, a Regional Library Corporation may neither
lease nor own the building in which the library operates, rather the building is
owned by a Council.
Please provide information on both (i) who leases the building and (ii) who it
is leased from. For example, a Regional Library Corporation may neither
lease nor own the building in which the library operates, rather the building is
owned by a Council.
If a more complicated leasing arrangement exists,
please provide details (for example, a shopping
centre owns the building, which is leased Council,
which Council then leases to the library):
_______________________________________
18c
If the building is leased, what is the cost of the lease? Are
outgoings included in this amount?
25 May 2007
Cost of Lease: $ __________
Yes, Outgoings are included
14
B.
The questions in Part B are intended to obtain information on the age
and condition of the building within which the library is located as well
as the extent to which the library premises complies with current
building design principles.
Design of the Building
19
When was the original building structure containing the
branch library built?
pre 1900
1900-1919
1920-1939
1940-1959
1960-1979
1980-1989
1990-2000
post 2000
20
Is the building, or part of it, heritage listed?
Yes
No
21a
Was the building purpose built to contain a library?
Yes
No
21b
If not, when was the branch library established?
Year:_____________
21c
If not, what was the original purpose of the building?
Please specify ___________________
Unknown
22a
When was the last major refurbishment of the Branch Library
building undertaken? What did it cost?
No refurbishment
Refurbished, Year:_____________
Value ($): _____________ please
indicate to the nearest $100,000
Major works is defined as change to internal partitions, changing room
shapes and sizes, changes to entry and exits. Major works does not include
only undertaking painting or replacement of carpet.
If the building has received several minor works over the last 5 years, which if
built together would constitute major works, please treat all works as the one
refurbishment. Please indicate in the ‘year’ response column the number of
years over which the works were undertaken.
25 May 2007
15
22b
For that refurbishment, please identify what works were done
(please tick all applicable)
Major works is defined as change to internal partitions, changing room
shapes and sizes, changes to entry and exits. Major works does not include
only undertaking painting or replacement of carpet.
Internal reorganisation of space
Additional floor space
Decreased floor space
Internal structural alterations
Improved collection areas (as defined in Q12)
Improved reading and study areas (defined in
Q12)
Improved resource areas (defined in Q12)
Improved staff areas (defined in Q12)
Improved amenities areas (defined in Q12)
Improvements to other areas (defined in Q12.
eg cafes). Please specify _____________
Improved shelving
Building services upgrade (eg lifts)
Fire safety improvements
Improved disabled access
Energy consumption improvements
Increased computer access
Wireless internet
Carpeting or other change to floor covering
Painting
Building materials - external cladding
Heating
Air conditioning
Other, Please specify ______
Yes (please specify what year _________)
No
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service Manager.
23
Has a building audit been undertaken of the branch library to
identify compliance with the Building Code of Australia (BCA)
in the last 5 years?
If the building has received several minor works over the last 5 years, which if
built together would constitute major works, please treat all works as the one
refurbishment. Please indicate in the ‘year’ response column the number of
years over which the works were undertaken.
This includes AS 1428.1, 1428.2, 1428.3 and 1428.4.
24
Does the branch library building comply with fire rating
assessments?
Yes
No
Haven’t undertaken an assessment
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service Manager.
25a
Does the branch library comply with the Australian Standards
- Design for Access and Mobility (AS1428) and the Building
Code of Australia (BCA)?
Yes
No
No requirement to
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service Manager.
25b
Has an access audit been undertaken of the branch library
building? If yes, when
Yes (please specify what year _________)
No
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service Manager.
25c
Is the main entrance wheelchair accessible?
Yes
No
25 May 2007
16
25d
If the branch library is constructed over more than one level,
are all levels wheelchair accessible (such as a passenger
lift)?
Yes
No
Not over more than one level
25e
Is there wheelchair parking near the main entrance? If yes,
how many wheelchair parking bays are there?
Yes (Number of bays: ____________)
No
25f
Is the aisle space provided between shelving wide enough for
wheelchair access?
Yes
No
25g
Is there a wheelchair accessible toilet?
Yes
No
How would you rate your branch library‘s lighting levels?
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
26
To be considered accessible, an aisle should be 1.2 metres wide, and
provide a turning area at each end.
Good quality lighting is essential for the health, safety and well-being of
workers. It is necessary to create a visual environment in which hazards are
visible, relevant details of the task are made easy to see and adverse factors
such as glare and reflections are excluded or controlled.
Please provide any comments you wish to make:
_______________________________________
In your response, please consider that a ‘Satisfactory’ response would
indicate for example that lighting illuminates all shelf areas evenly, with no
variations of light and dark areas. A ‘Poor’ response would indicate for
example, that you cannot read the Dewey Decimal Classification codes on all
books.
The relevant lighting standard is AS 1680.
27a
How would you rate your branch library‘s internal public
information signage?
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
Please provide any comments you wish to make:
Signs should provide basic directional information to library users. In your
response, please consider that ‘Satisfactory’ signage is that which complies with AS2899 standards,
‘Poor’ signage is that which results in numerous requests being received for
assistance in physically locating information.
_______________________________________
27b
How would you rate your branch library‘s external public
information signage?
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
Please provide any comments you wish to make:
This includes Street signposting / directional signs indicating the library
location from neighbouring streets, and Exterior identification near the
entrance.
_______________________________________
25 May 2007
17
28a
Does the building include any of the following measures to
reduce energy consumption? (please tick all applicable)
28b
Has there been an energy audit undertaken of the branch
library building?
Natural light
Energy efficient light globes
Solar panels
Water efficient taps
Grey water usage
Energy efficient air-conditioning/heating
Facilities for recycling (ie paper, waste)
Dual flush toilets
Cycle parking or secure storage
Other (Please specify _____________)
Yes, (Please specify year ___________)
No
Don't know
An energy audit is a way to identify energy saving opportunities and improve
energy efficiency.
29
How much does the Branch Library spend on the following
utilities each quarter?
Electricity: $______
Gas: $______
Water: $______
Please leave blank if not applicable (ie there is no gas service).
30
Which of the following security measures does the Branch
Library employ? (please tick all applicable)
Security alarm
Access control (proximity access card)
Management plan / procedures manual
Staff training
External lighting
Clearly marked fire exits
Fire extinguishers
Parking close to entry
Well lit book return chutes
Fire alarms
Sprinkler systems
Fire proof book return chutes
Other, please specify __________
This questions relates to the building, and staff and patrons within it, not to
the security of book stock and other assets.
31
How would you rate your branch library’s safety and security
measures?
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
A ‘Satisfactory’ response indicates that you feel safe at work.
32A
Does the branch library building comply with Occupational
Health and Safety (OH&S) standards?
Yes
No
Don’t know
Haven’t undertaken an audit
Note that this question refers to the building, not work practices.
32b
Has an Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) audit been
undertaken of the branch library building? If yes, when
Yes, (Please specify year ___________)
No
Don't know
25 May 2007
18
33a
How would you rate the branch library building?
33b
How would you rate the internal layout and design of the
branch library?
33c
How would you rate the overall standard of your branch
library?
33d
What do you consider to be the three finest attributes of your
branch library building? (list in order of importance)
1._________
2._________
3._________
33e
What do you consider to be the three worst features of your
branch library building? (list in order of importance)
1._________
2._________
3._________
C.
Location of the Building
34
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
This is an assessment of the physical building only.
That is the elements of the layout which can be altered, such as shelving,
desks.
This is an assessment of more than the Building fabric, and includes stock,
service, satisfaction of user needs, etc
The questions in Part C are intended to obtain information on the
location of the library premises.
Is the branch library premises located:
(please tick all applicable)
Within
library
building:
Adjacent
to library
building:
within
400m
of:
a shopping
centre
a shopping or
business
precinct
a main street
a Council
administration
precinct
train station
bus stop
cultural
facilities
Car parking
eating
facilities
school
recreation/
sporting
facility
parks and
gardens
other (pls
specify _____
25 May 2007
19
35a
Is there car parking near the branch library? If yes, please
provide the number of spaces.
No
Yes (Please specify number of spaces _____)
35b
If yes, is this car parking free or paid?
Free
Paid
35c
___________ car parks
35d
If yes, how many car parks are provided solely for the use of
branch library patrons?
If yes, is there enough car parking near the library?
35e
How many car parks are provided for staff use?
___________ car parks
Please insert zero if there are none.
D.
Building Management and Maintenance
36a
Does the Council or Library Service have an asset
management plan? If yes, for how many years does the plan
extend?
If yes, which of the following does it cover? Please note the
year at which it is planned (if known). Please tick all
applicable.
No
Yes (Years _______)
The questions in Part D are intended to obtain information on the
management and maintenance of the library premises.
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager.
New building (year _________)
Closure (year _________)
Relocation (year _________)
Refurbishment of existing building (year
_________)
Extensions (year _________)
Maintenance (year _________)
Other (please specify _________) (year
_________)
36b
37
What is the total insurance value of the library building?
Please note the date of the assessment.
Yes
No
$_________ (Year: ________)
Date not known
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
This does not include the value of building contents.
Please answer without separating commas.
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
38
What is the average annual cost of maintenance for the
branch library building? Please provide this information by
type of expense.
Total amount $_________ (REQUIRED)
Cleaning $_________
Unplanned reactive maintenance work $_________
Planned preventative maintenance work
$_________
Planned works program costs (condition-based)
$_________
Major plant and equipment replacement
$_________
Other (please specify ________) $_________
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
39
What is the estimated backlog of planned maintenance of the
library building? (in $ value)
$ _________________
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
25 May 2007
20
40
What was the capital expenditure on the branch library
building in the 06/07 financial year? ($)
$ _________________
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
41
What is the projected capital expenditure on the branch
library building for the 07/08 financial year? ($)
$ _________________
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
42
Does the Local Authority/ library service carry out regular
building condition surveys? If yes, at what intervals?
In answering this question, please liaise with Council’s Property Asset
Manager or your Library Service manager.
Less than every 5 years
Between 2 and 5 years
Every second year
Every year
Several times a year
No, regular condition surveys are not done
The questions in Part E are intended to obtain information on library
development planning. Please liaise with the manager of your Library
Service in completing this section of the survey.
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
E.
Planning and Development
43a
Are major refurbishments/ extensions required to the existing
building within the next five years?
Yes
No
43b
Is the site able to accommodate future expansion of the
library if required?
Yes
No
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
44a
Are major alterations planned to the existing building?
Yes
No
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
If yes, please indicate which of the following is involved -
Refurbishment of existing branch building
Demolition and replacement of branch building completely on the present site
Replacement of the branch building and
relocation to another site
Please note that this section of the survey does NOT deal with any
totally new branch libraries to be constructed on new sites. This
information will be provided by your Library Service Manager in
Question 7 of the survey
less than two years
between two and four years
more than four years time
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
44b
44c
If yes, when is it expected to be operational?
If yes, what is the proposed additional floor space (if any)?
(m2) _______
No extra floor space
Operational means the time at which construction is complete and the library
is operating.
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
44d
If yes, what is the likely budget (in $) for (Please indicate to the nearest $100,000).
25 May 2007
Capital building: $_______
Internal assets (eg shelving etc): $_______
This excludes budget for book stock and other resources.
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
21
44e
If yes, please identify what works are planned.
(please tick all applicable)
In answering this question, please liaise with your Library Service manager.
Internal reorganisation of space
Additional floor space
Decreased floor space
Internal structural alterations
Improved collection areas (as defined in Q12)
Improved reading and study areas (defined in
Q12)
Improved resource areas (defined in Q12)
Improved staff areas (defined in Q12)
Improved amenities areas (defined in Q12)
Improvements to other areas (defined in Q12.
eg cafes). Please specify _____________
Improved shelving
Building services upgrade (eg lifts)
Fire safety improvements
Improved disabled access
Energy consumption improvements
Increased computer access
Wireless internet
Carpeting or other change to floor covering
Painting
Building materials - external cladding
Heating
Air conditioning
Other, Please specify ______
Yes, Please provide detail ________
No
For example, internal reconfiguration or reallocation of space.
45
Do you currently have spaces which could be adapted for
new uses (as an alternative to major alterations)?
Thank you for your co-operation
25 May 2007
22
Appendix 2: List of survey respondents
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Bayside Library Service
Bayside City Council
Beaumaris
Brighton
Hampton
Sandringham
Brimbank Libraries
Brimbank City Council
Deer Park
Keilor
St Albans
Sunshine
Sydenham
Campaspe Regional Library
Campaspe Shire Council
Echuca
Kyabram
Rochester
Rushworth
Tongala
Casey-Cardinia Library
Corporation
Casey City Council
Cranbourne
Doveton
Endeavour Hills
Hampton Park
Narre Warren
Cardinia Shire Council
Emerald
Pakenham
Central Highlands Regional
Library
Ararat Rural City Council
Ararat
Ballarat City Council
Ballarat
Sebastopol
Wendouree
Central Goldfields Shire Council
Maryborough
Hepburn Shire Council
Clunes
Creswick
Daylesford
Moorabool Shire Council
Bacchus Marsh
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Pyrenees Shire Council
Avoca
Beaufort
City of Boroondara Library
Service
Southern Grampians Shire Council
Hamilton
Boroondara City Council
Ashburton
Balwyn
Camberwell
Hawthorn
Kew
Darebin Libraries
Darebin City Council
Fairfield
Northcote
Preston
Reservoir
East Gippsland Shire Library
East Gippsland Shire Council
Bairnsdale
Lakes Entrance
Omeo
Orbost
Paynesville
Eastern Regional Libraries
Knox City Council
Boronia
Ferntree Gully
Knox
Rowville
Maroondah City Council
Croydon
Ringwood
Yarra Ranges Shire Council
Belgrave
Healesville
Lilydale
Montrose
Mooroolbark
Mount Evelyn
Yarra Junction
Frankston Library Service
Frankston City Council
Carrum Downs
Frankston
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Gannawarra Library Service
Gannawarra Shire Council
Cohuna
Kerang
Leitchville
Quambatook
Geelong Regional Library
Corporation
Borough of Queenscliffe
Queenscliffe
Golden Plains Shire Council
no library building
Greater Geelong City Council
Barwon Heads
Belmont
Chilwell
Corio
Drysdale
Geelong
Geelong West
Highton
Newcomb
Ocean Grove
Surf Coast Shire Council
Grovedale
Torquay
Glen Eira Library and
Information Service
Glen Eira City Council
Bentleigh
Carnegie
Caulfield
Elsternwick
Glenelg Libraries
Glenelg Shire Council
Casterton
Heywood
Portland
Goldfields Library
Corporation
Mount Alexander Shire Council
Castlemaine
Greater Bendigo City Council
Bendigo
Heathcote
Kangaroo Flat
Eaglehawk
Loddon Shire Council
Pyramid Hill
Macedon Ranges Shire Council
Gisborne
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Kyneton
Woodend
Goulburn Valley Regional
Library Corporation
Greater Shepparton City Council
Cobram
Mooroopna
Nathalia
Numurkah
Shepparton
Tatura
Yarrawonga
Strathbogie Shire Council
Euroa
Nagambie
Violet Town
Greater Dandenong Libraries
Greater Dandenong City Council
Dandenong
Springvale
High Country Library
Corporation
Alpine Shire Council
Bright
Mt Beauty
Myrtleford
Hobsons Bay Libraries
Benalla Rural City Council
Benalla
Mansfield Shire Council
Mansfield
Wangaratta Rural City Council
Wangaratta
Hobsons Bay City Council
Altona
Altona Meadows
Newport
Williamstown
Hume Global Learning
Village Library Service
Hume City Council
Broadmeadows
Craigieburn
Gladstone Park
Sunbury
Tullamarine
Kingston Information and
Library Service
Kingston City Council
Chelsea
Cheltenham
Clarinda
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Dingley
Highett
Moorabbin
Parkdale
South Oakleigh
Latrobe City Library Service
Latrobe City Council
Churchill
Moe
Morwell
Traralgon
Maribyrnong Library Service
Maribyrnong City Council
Footscray
Maribyrnong
West Footscray
Yarraville
Melbourne Library Service
Melbourne City Council
East Melbourne
Melbourne (City Library)
North Melbourne
Melton Library and
Information Service
Melton Shire Council
Mildura Rural City Council
Library Service
Mildura Rural City Council
Caroline Springs
Melton
Irymple
Merbein
Mildura
Red Cliffs
Mitchell Shire Library and
Information Service
Mitchell Shire Council
Broadford
Kilmore
Romsey
Seymour
Wallan
Monash Public Library
Service
Monash City Council
Clayton
Glen Waverley
Mount Waverley
Oakleigh
Wheelers Hill
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Moonee Valley Library
Service
Moonee Valley City Council
Ascot Vale
East Keilor
Flemington
Moonee Ponds
Niddrie
Moreland City Libraries
Moreland City Council
Brunswick
Brunswick West
Coburg
Fawkner
Glenroy
Mornington Peninsula
Library
Mornington Peninsula Shire Council
Hastings
Mornington
Rosebud
Somerville
Murrindindi Library Service
Murrindindi Shire Council
Alexandra
Kinglake
Yea
Port Phillip Library Service
Port Phillip City Council
Albert Park
Emerald Hill
Middle Park
Port Melbourne
St Kilda
Stonnington Library and
Information Service
Stonnington City Council
Malvern
Malvern East
Prahran
South Yarra
Swan Hill Regional Library
Service
Swan Hill Rural City Council
Swan Hill
Upper Murray Regional
Library
Indigo Shire Council
Beechworth
Chiltern
Rutherglen
Towong Shire Council
Corryong
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Tallangatta
Wellington Shire Library
Wodonga City Council
Wodonga
Wellington Shire Council
Heyfield
Maffra
Rosedale
Sale
Stratford
Yarram
West Gippsland Regional
Library Corporation
Bass Coast Shire Council
Cowes
Inverloch
Wonthaggi
Baw Baw Shire Council
Drouin
Neerim South
Noojee
Warragul
South Gippsland Shire Council
Foster
Korumburra
Leongatha
Mirboo North
Poowong
Whitehorse Manningham
Regional Library Corporation
Manningham City Council
Bulleen
Doncaster
Doncaster East (The Pines)
Warrandyte
Whitehorse City Council
Blackburn
Box Hill
Nunawading
Vermont South
Wimmera Regional Library
Corporation
Buloke Shire Council
Birchip
Hindmarsh Shire Council
Dimboola
Nhill
Horsham Rural City Council
Horsham
Library service
Local Government Authority
Branch
Northern Grampians Shire Council
St Arnaud
Stawell
West Wimmera Shire Council
Edenhope
Goroke
Harrow
Kaniva
Yarriambiack Shire Council
Warracknabeal
Wyndham City Library
Service
Wyndham City Council
Werribee CBD
Yarra Libraries
Yarra City Council
Werribee, Heaths Rd
Carlton
Collingwood
Fitzroy
North Fitzroy
Richmond
Yarra Plenty Regional Library
Service
Banyule City Council
Ivanhoe
Rosanna
Watsonia
Nillumbik Shire Council
Diamond Valley
Eltham
Whittlesea City Council
Lalor
Mill Park
Thomastown
Appendix 3: Tabulated data – LGA survey
Q1 LGA Population (Banded)
Valid
<10000
10000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000 - 149999
150000+
Total
Frequency
10
28
15
14
8
75
Percent
13.3
37.3
20.0
18.7
10.7
100.0
Valid Percent
13.3
37.3
20.0
18.7
10.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
13.3
50.7
70.7
89.3
100.0
Q2A Total Library membership (Banded)
Valid
<5000
5000 - 24999
25000 - 49999
50000 - 74999
75000 - 99999
100000+
Total
Frequency
10
29
10
16
8
2
75
Percent
13.3
38.7
13.3
21.3
10.7
2.7
100.0
Valid Percent
13.3
38.7
13.3
21.3
10.7
2.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
13.3
52.0
65.3
86.7
97.3
100.0
Q2B Members Living within the LGA (Banded)
Valid
<5000
5000 - 24999
25000 - 49999
50000 - 74999
75000 - 99999
Not Stated
Total
Frequency
19
27
13
9
3
4
75
Percent
25.3
36.0
17.3
12.0
4.0
5.3
100.0
Valid Percent
25.3
36.0
17.3
12.0
4.0
5.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
25.3
61.3
78.7
90.7
94.7
100.0
Q2B % not living in LGA (Banded)
Valid
0
0.1 - 9.9
10.0 - 24.9
25.0 - 49.9
50.0 - 74.9
75.0 - 100
Not Stated
Total
Frequency
8
24
18
6
3
12
4
75
Percent
10.7
32.0
24.0
8.0
4.0
16.0
5.3
100.0
Valid Percent
10.7
32.0
24.0
8.0
4.0
16.0
5.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
10.7
42.7
66.7
74.7
78.7
94.7
100.0
Page 1
Q2B % of LGA population who are members (Banded)
Valid
0.1 - 4.9
10.0 - 19.9
20.0 - 29.9
30.0 - 39.9
40.0 - 49.9
50.0 - 100.0
Not Stated
Total
Frequency
8
5
5
26
17
10
4
75
Percent
10.7
6.7
6.7
34.7
22.7
13.3
5.3
100.0
Valid Percent
10.7
6.7
6.7
34.7
22.7
13.3
5.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
10.7
17.3
24.0
58.7
81.3
94.7
100.0
Q3 Non-resident membership not Significant
Valid
Not Significant
Significant
Not Stated
Total
Frequency
46
23
6
75
Percent
61.3
30.7
8.0
100.0
Valid Percent
61.3
30.7
8.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
61.3
92.0
100.0
Q6A Off-Site Library Floor Space
Valid
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
21
54
75
Percent
28.0
72.0
100.0
Valid Percent
28.0
72.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
28.0
100.0
Q6B Off-Site Administration Area
Valid
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
16
59
75
Percent
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
21.3
78.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
21.3
100.0
Q6B Size of Off-Site Administration Area (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<20
50 - 99
250 - 499
500 - 999
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
5
2
3
5
16
59
75
Percent
1.3
6.7
2.7
4.0
6.7
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
6.3
31.3
12.5
18.8
31.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.3
37.5
50.0
68.8
100.0
Page 2
Q6B Off-Site Storage Area
Valid
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
13
62
75
Percent
17.3
82.7
100.0
Valid Percent
17.3
82.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
17.3
100.0
Q6B Size of Off-Site Storage Area (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
2
1
1
4
1
9
66
75
<5
5-9
10 - 24
25 - 49
50+
Total
System
Percent
2.7
1.3
1.3
5.3
1.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
33.3
44.4
88.9
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
11.1
11.1
44.4
11.1
100.0
Q6B Other Off-Site Area
Valid
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
9
66
75
Percent
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
12.0
88.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.0
100.0
Q6B Size of Other Type of Off-Site Area (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<20
200 - 499
500+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
2
4
1
2
9
66
75
Percent
2.7
5.3
1.3
2.7
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
44.4
11.1
22.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
66.7
77.8
100.0
Q6C(A) Lessor of Administration Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Leased
Council
Private Owner
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
7
4
2
2
15
60
75
Percent
9.3
5.3
2.7
2.7
20.0
80.0
100.0
Valid Percent
46.7
26.7
13.3
13.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
46.7
73.3
86.7
100.0
Page 3
Q6C(A) Lessor of Administration Building (other type)
Valid
Frequency
75
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q6C(A) Owner of Administration Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Council
Private Owner
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
13
2
1
16
59
75
Percent
17.3
2.7
1.3
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
81.3
12.5
6.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
81.3
93.8
100.0
Q6C(A) Owner of Administration Building (other type)
Valid
Frequency
75
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q6C(B) Lessor of Storage Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Leased
Private Owner
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
5
4
4
13
62
75
Percent
6.7
5.3
5.3
17.3
82.7
100.0
Valid Percent
38.5
30.8
30.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
38.5
69.2
100.0
Q6C(B) Lessor of Storage Building (other type)
Valid
Frequency
75
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q6C(B) Owner of Storage Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Council
Private Owner
Total
System
Frequency
9
4
13
62
75
Percent
12.0
5.3
17.3
82.7
100.0
Valid Percent
69.2
30.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
69.2
100.0
Q6C(B) Owner of Storage Building (other type)
Valid
Frequency
75
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Page 4
Q6C(C) Lessor of Other Type of Off-Site Area
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Leased
Council
Private Owner
Community Owned
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
1
3
1
1
9
66
75
Percent
4.0
1.3
4.0
1.3
1.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.3
44.4
77.8
88.9
100.0
Valid Percent
33.3
11.1
33.3
11.1
11.1
100.0
Q6C(C) Lessor of Other Type of Off-Site Area (other type)
Valid
Frequency
74
Percent
98.7
Valid Percent
98.7
Cumulative
Percent
98.7
1
1.3
1.3
100.0
75
100.0
100.0
We lease a room from
the Private Owner
Total
Q6C(C) Owner of Other Type of Off-Site Area
Valid
Missing
Total
Council
Private Owner
Community Owned
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
2
1
3
9
66
75
Percent
4.0
2.7
1.3
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.3
22.2
11.1
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.3
55.6
66.7
100.0
Q6C(C) Owner of Other Type of Off-Site Area (other type)
Valid
Frequency
75
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q7A Number of New Buildings Planned
Frequency
Valid
No New buildings
planned
One
Two
Three
Total
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
50
66.7
66.7
66.7
16
7
2
75
21.3
9.3
2.7
100.0
21.3
9.3
2.7
100.0
88.0
97.3
100.0
Page 5
Q7A Number of New Buildings Planned
Frequency
Valid
No New buildings
planned
One
Two
Three
Total
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
60
80.0
80.0
80.0
12
2
1
75
16.0
2.7
1.3
100.0
16.0
2.7
1.3
100.0
96.0
98.7
100.0
Q7A Unique New Buildings
Valid
Missing
Total
New Building
Works affecting
existing branch
Total
System
Frequency
13
Percent
17.3
Valid Percent
52.0
Cumulative
Percent
52.0
12
16.0
48.0
100.0
25
50
75
33.3
66.7
100.0
100.0
Q7(I)B First Building - Timeframe
Valid
Missing
Total
< 2 years
2 - 4 Years
> 4 Years
Total
System
Frequency
8
10
7
25
50
75
Percent
10.7
13.3
9.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
32.0
40.0
28.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.0
72.0
100.0
Q7(I)C First Building - Proposed Floor space (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
150 - 199
200 - 499
500+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
4
13
6
25
50
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
5.3
17.3
8.0
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
4.0
4.0
16.0
52.0
24.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.0
8.0
24.0
76.0
100.0
Page 6
Q7(I)D First Building - Capital Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
<500,000
500000 - 999999
1000000 - 2499999
2500000 - 4999999
5000000 - 9999999
10000000+
Total
System
Frequency
7
1
1
2
6
5
3
25
50
75
Percent
9.3
1.3
1.3
2.7
8.0
6.7
4.0
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
28.0
4.0
4.0
8.0
24.0
20.0
12.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
28.0
32.0
36.0
44.0
68.0
88.0
100.0
Q7(I)D First Building - Internal Fit-out Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<100000
100000 - 249999
250000 - 499999
500000 - 999999
1000000 - 1499999
1500000+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
3
4
2
3
3
7
25
50
75
Percent
4.0
4.0
5.3
2.7
4.0
4.0
9.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
12.0
12.0
16.0
8.0
12.0
12.0
28.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.0
24.0
40.0
48.0
60.0
72.0
100.0
Q7(I)D First Building - Total Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000000
1000000 - 1999999
2000000 - 4999999
5000000 - 8499999
8500000+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
1
8
3
3
7
25
50
75
Percent
4.0
1.3
10.7
4.0
4.0
9.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
12.0
4.0
32.0
12.0
12.0
28.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.0
16.0
48.0
60.0
72.0
100.0
Page 7
Q7(i)e First Building - Type of Facility Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Joint Use
Co-Located
Neither
Both Joint Use
and Co-Located
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
16
4
Percent
4.0
21.3
5.3
Valid Percent
12.0
64.0
16.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.0
76.0
92.0
1
1.3
4.0
96.0
1
25
50
75
1.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
4.0
100.0
100.0
Q7(I)F First Building - Proximity to a shopping centre
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
6
6
9
4
25
50
75
Percent
8.0
8.0
12.0
5.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
24.0
24.0
36.0
16.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.0
48.0
84.0
100.0
Q7(I)F First Building - Proximity to a shopping or business precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
9
9
3
4
25
50
75
Percent
12.0
12.0
4.0
5.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
36.0
36.0
12.0
16.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
36.0
72.0
84.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to a main street
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
10
7
4
4
25
50
75
Percent
13.3
9.3
5.3
5.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
40.0
28.0
16.0
16.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
40.0
68.0
84.0
100.0
Page 8
First Building - Proximity to a Council administration precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
2
4
10
6
25
50
75
Percent
4.0
2.7
5.3
13.3
8.0
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
12.0
8.0
16.0
40.0
24.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.0
20.0
36.0
76.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to train station
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
4
15
5
25
50
75
Percent
1.3
5.3
20.0
6.7
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
4.0
16.0
60.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.0
20.0
80.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to bus stop
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
5
12
4
4
25
50
75
Percent
6.7
16.0
5.3
5.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
20.0
48.0
16.0
16.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
20.0
68.0
84.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to cultural facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
5
4
4
7
5
25
50
75
Percent
6.7
5.3
5.3
9.3
6.7
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
20.0
16.0
16.0
28.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
20.0
36.0
52.0
80.0
100.0
Page 9
First Building - Proximity to car parking
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
18
1
2
4
25
50
75
Percent
24.0
1.3
2.7
5.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
72.0
4.0
8.0
16.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
72.0
76.0
84.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to eating facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
7
2
9
2
4
24
51
75
Percent
9.3
2.7
12.0
2.7
5.3
32.0
68.0
100.0
Valid Percent
29.2
8.3
37.5
8.3
16.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
29.2
37.5
75.0
83.3
100.0
First Building - Proximity to school
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
5
5
10
5
25
50
75
Percent
6.7
6.7
13.3
6.7
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
20.0
20.0
40.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
20.0
40.0
80.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to recreation/ sporting facility
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
4
7
7
6
25
50
75
Percent
1.3
5.3
9.3
9.3
8.0
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
4.0
16.0
28.0
28.0
24.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.0
20.0
48.0
76.0
100.0
Page 10
First Building - Proximity to parks and gardens
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
5
7
9
4
25
50
75
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Percent
6.7
9.3
12.0
5.3
33.3
66.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
20.0
48.0
84.0
100.0
Valid Percent
20.0
28.0
36.0
16.0
100.0
First Building - Proximity to other facility (Distance)
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
2
6
8
67
75
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Percent
2.7
8.0
10.7
89.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
25.0
100.0
Valid Percent
25.0
75.0
100.0
Q7(i)g First Building - Rebuild at Existing Site
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
8
17
25
50
75
At Exisitng Site
New Building
Total
System
Percent
10.7
22.7
33.3
66.7
100.0
Valid Percent
32.0
68.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.0
100.0
Q7Aii Unique New Buildings
Valid
Missing
Total
New Building
Works affecting
existing branch
Total
System
Frequency
4
Percent
5.3
Valid Percent
44.4
Cumulative
Percent
44.4
5
6.7
55.6
100.0
9
66
75
12.0
88.0
100.0
100.0
Q7(ii)b Second Building - Timeframe
Valid
Missing
Total
2 - 4 Years
> 4 Years
Total
System
Frequency
3
6
9
66
75
Percent
4.0
8.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.3
66.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.3
100.0
Page 11
Second Building - Proposed Floor space (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
200 - 499
500+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
5
2
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
6.7
2.7
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
11.1
55.6
22.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
22.2
77.8
100.0
Second Building - Capital Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
<500,000
1000000 - 2499999
2500000 - 4999999
5000000 - 9999999
Total
System
Frequency
3
1
1
2
2
9
66
75
Percent
4.0
1.3
1.3
2.7
2.7
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.3
11.1
11.1
22.2
22.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.3
44.4
55.6
77.8
100.0
Second Building - Internal Fit-out Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<100000
100000 - 249999
250000 - 499999
500000 - 999999
1000000 - 1499999
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
2
1
1
1
1
2
8
67
75
Percent
2.7
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.7
10.7
89.3
100.0
Valid Percent
25.0
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
25.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
25.0
37.5
50.0
62.5
75.0
100.0
Second Building - Total Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000000
2000000 - 4999999
5000000 - 8499999
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
2
3
2
2
9
66
75
Percent
2.7
4.0
2.7
2.7
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
33.3
22.2
22.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
55.6
77.8
100.0
Page 12
Q7(ii)e Second Building - Type of Facility Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Co-Located
Neither
Total
System
Frequency
6
3
9
66
75
Percent
8.0
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
66.7
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
66.7
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to a shopping centre
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
2
3
1
3
9
66
75
Percent
2.7
4.0
1.3
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
33.3
11.1
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
55.6
66.7
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to a shopping or business precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
3
2
3
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
4.0
2.7
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
33.3
22.2
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
44.4
66.7
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to a main street
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
2
3
1
3
9
66
75
Percent
2.7
4.0
1.3
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
33.3
11.1
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
55.6
66.7
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to a Council administration precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
4
4
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
5.3
5.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
44.4
44.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
55.6
100.0
Page 13
Second Building - Proximity to train station
Valid
Missing
Total
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
3
2
4
9
66
75
Percent
4.0
2.7
5.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.3
22.2
44.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.3
55.6
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to bus stop
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
4
1
3
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
5.3
1.3
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
44.4
11.1
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
55.6
66.7
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to cultural facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
3
4
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
4.0
5.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
11.1
33.3
44.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
22.2
55.6
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to car parking
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
6
1
2
9
66
75
Percent
8.0
1.3
2.7
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
66.7
11.1
22.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
66.7
77.8
100.0
Page 14
Second Building - Proximity to eating facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
3
1
4
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
4.0
1.3
5.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
33.3
11.1
44.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
44.4
55.6
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to school
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
2
2
4
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
2.7
2.7
5.3
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
22.2
22.2
44.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
33.3
55.6
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to recreation/ sporting facility
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
5
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
6.7
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
11.1
22.2
55.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
22.2
44.4
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to parks and gardens
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
1
4
1
3
9
66
75
Percent
1.3
5.3
1.3
4.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
44.4
11.1
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
55.6
66.7
100.0
Second Building - Proximity to other facility (Distance)
Valid
Missing
Total
N/A
System
Frequency
9
66
75
Percent
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Page 15
Q7(ii)g Second Building - Rebuild at Existing Site
Valid
Missing
Total
At Exisitng Site
New Building
Total
System
Frequency
3
6
9
66
75
Percent
4.0
8.0
12.0
88.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.3
66.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.3
100.0
Q7Aiii Unique New Buildings
Valid
Missing
Total
New Building
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q7(iii)b Third Building - Timeframe
Valid
Missing
Total
2 - 4 Years
> 4 Years
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Proposed Floor space (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
500+
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Third Building - Capital Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
1000000 - 2499999
2500000 - 4999999
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Internal Fit-out Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<100000
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Page 16
Third Building - Total Budget ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
1000000 - 1999999
2000000 - 4999999
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Q7(iIi)e Third Building - Type of Facility Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
2
73
75
Co-Located
System
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to a shopping centre
Valid
Missing
Total
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to a shopping or business precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Within 400m
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to a main street
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to a Council administration precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
N/A
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Page 17
Third Building - Proximity to train station
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
2
73
75
N/A
System
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to bus stop
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
2
73
75
Within 400m
System
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to cultural facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to car parking
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
2
73
75
Adjacent
System
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to eating facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to school
Valid
Missing
Total
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Page 18
Third Building - Proximity to recreation/ sporting facility
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to parks and gardens
Valid
Missing
Total
Within 400m
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Third Building - Proximity to other facility (Distance)
Valid
Missing
Total
N/A
System
Frequency
2
73
75
Percent
2.7
97.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Q7(iii)g Third Building - Rebuild at Existing Site
Valid
Missing
Total
At Exisitng Site
New Building
Total
System
Frequency
1
1
2
73
75
Percent
1.3
1.3
2.7
97.3
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
50.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
100.0
Q8 LGA Capital Expenditure - 2006/07 (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<500000
500000 - 999999
1500000 - 9999999
10000000 - 19999999
20000000 - 29999999
30000000+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
13
2
14
4
12
5
22
72
3
75
Percent
17.3
2.7
18.7
5.3
16.0
6.7
29.3
96.0
4.0
100.0
Valid Percent
18.1
2.8
19.4
5.6
16.7
6.9
30.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
18.1
20.8
40.3
45.8
62.5
69.4
100.0
Page 19
Q8 LGA Capital Expenditure - 2007/08 (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<500000
500000 - 999999
1000000 - 1499999
1500000 - 9999999
10000000 - 19999999
20000000 - 29999999
30000000+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
11
2
2
10
8
10
6
23
72
3
75
Percent
14.7
2.7
2.7
13.3
10.7
13.3
8.0
30.7
96.0
4.0
100.0
Valid Percent
15.3
2.8
2.8
13.9
11.1
13.9
8.3
31.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
15.3
18.1
20.8
34.7
45.8
59.7
68.1
100.0
Q8 LGA Capital Expenditure - 2008/09 (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<500000
500000 - 999999
1000000 - 1499999
1500000 - 9999999
10000000 - 19999999
20000000 - 29999999
30000000+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
8
1
1
8
9
10
3
32
72
3
75
Percent
10.7
1.3
1.3
10.7
12.0
13.3
4.0
42.7
96.0
4.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.1
1.4
1.4
11.1
12.5
13.9
4.2
44.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
12.5
13.9
25.0
37.5
51.4
55.6
100.0
Q8 LGA Capital Expenditure - 2009/10 (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<500000
1000000 - 1499999
1500000 - 9999999
10000000 - 19999999
20000000 - 29999999
30000000+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
7
2
4
9
9
4
37
72
3
75
Percent
9.3
2.7
5.3
12.0
12.0
5.3
49.3
96.0
4.0
100.0
Valid Percent
9.7
2.8
5.6
12.5
12.5
5.6
51.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
9.7
12.5
18.1
30.6
43.1
48.6
100.0
Page 20
Appendix 4: Tabulated data – Branch survey
Q9 Operating Hours per Week (Banded)
Valid
0
<15
15 - 29
30 - 39
40 - 59
60+
Total
Frequency
1
19
41
46
109
28
244
Percent
.4
7.8
16.8
18.9
44.7
11.5
100.0
Valid Percent
.4
7.8
16.8
18.9
44.7
11.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.4
8.2
25.0
43.9
88.5
100.0
Q10 Visits each week (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
<500
500 - 999
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 8999
9000+
Total
System
Frequency
2
56
33
61
65
20
5
1
243
1
244
Percent
.8
23.0
13.5
25.0
26.6
8.2
2.0
.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
.8
23.0
13.6
25.1
26.7
8.2
2.1
.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.8
23.9
37.4
62.6
89.3
97.5
99.6
100.0
Q11 Gross Floor Area (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<150
150 - 249
250 - 499
500 - 999
1000 - 1499
1500 - 1999
2000+
Total
System
Frequency
35
44
54
51
36
14
5
239
5
244
Percent
14.3
18.0
22.1
20.9
14.8
5.7
2.0
98.0
2.0
100.0
Valid Percent
14.6
18.4
22.6
21.3
15.1
5.9
2.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
14.6
33.1
55.6
77.0
92.1
97.9
100.0
Page 1
Q12a Functional Area - Collections (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 49
50 - 149
150 - 299
300 - 449
450 - 599
600+
Total
System
Frequency
1
35
62
54
43
11
20
226
18
244
Percent
.4
14.3
25.4
22.1
17.6
4.5
8.2
92.6
7.4
100.0
Valid Percent
.4
15.5
27.4
23.9
19.0
4.9
8.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.4
15.9
43.4
67.3
86.3
91.2
100.0
Q12B Functional Area - Reading/ Study (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 24
25 - 49
50 - 199
200 - 349
350 - 499
500+
Total
System
Frequency
17
47
45
73
28
9
4
223
21
244
Percent
7.0
19.3
18.4
29.9
11.5
3.7
1.6
91.4
8.6
100.0
Valid Percent
7.6
21.1
20.2
32.7
12.6
4.0
1.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
7.6
28.7
48.9
81.6
94.2
98.2
100.0
Q12C Functional Area - Resource Areas (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1-9
10 - 49
50 - 99
100 - 199
200 - 299
300+
Total
System
Frequency
9
25
100
50
31
8
2
225
19
244
Percent
3.7
10.2
41.0
20.5
12.7
3.3
.8
92.2
7.8
100.0
Valid Percent
4.0
11.1
44.4
22.2
13.8
3.6
.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.0
15.1
59.6
81.8
95.6
99.1
100.0
Page 2
Q12D Functional Area - Staff Areas (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 24
25 - 49
50 - 299
300 - 499
500 - 799
800+
Total
System
Frequency
8
65
46
92
5
3
1
220
24
244
Percent
3.3
26.6
18.9
37.7
2.0
1.2
.4
90.2
9.8
100.0
Valid Percent
3.6
29.5
20.9
41.8
2.3
1.4
.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.6
33.2
54.1
95.9
98.2
99.5
100.0
Q12E Functional Area - Amenities Area (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 19
20 - 49
50 - 149
150 - 299
300 - 449
450+
Total
System
Frequency
10
50
46
72
19
10
5
212
32
244
Percent
4.1
20.5
18.9
29.5
7.8
4.1
2.0
86.9
13.1
100.0
Valid Percent
4.7
23.6
21.7
34.0
9.0
4.7
2.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.7
28.3
50.0
84.0
92.9
97.6
100.0
Q12F Functional Area - Other (m2) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 14
15 - 49
50 - 99
100 - 199
200+
Total
System
Frequency
90
8
14
7
10
16
145
99
244
Percent
36.9
3.3
5.7
2.9
4.1
6.6
59.4
40.6
100.0
Valid Percent
62.1
5.5
9.7
4.8
6.9
11.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
62.1
67.6
77.2
82.1
89.0
100.0
Q13A Number of Levels
Valid
Missing
Total
1
2
3
Total
System
Frequency
205
31
7
243
1
244
Percent
84.0
12.7
2.9
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
84.4
12.8
2.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
84.4
97.1
100.0
Page 3
Q13B Levels Publicly Accessible
Valid
Missing
Total
1
2
3
Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
213
22
4
4
243
1
244
Percent
87.3
9.0
1.6
1.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
87.7
9.1
1.6
1.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
87.7
96.7
98.4
100.0
Q13C Ground Floor with Street Frontage
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
230
9
4
243
1
244
Percent
94.3
3.7
1.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
94.7
3.7
1.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
94.7
98.4
100.0
Q13D Lifts?
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, for patrons
Yes, for goods
Yes, both passangers
and goods
Total
System
Frequency
207
3
9
Percent
84.8
1.2
3.7
Valid Percent
85.2
1.2
3.7
Cumulative
Percent
85.2
86.4
90.1
24
9.8
9.9
100.0
243
1
244
99.6
.4
100.0
100.0
Q13E Do Lifts Service all Levels
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
33
3
36
208
244
Percent
13.5
1.2
14.8
85.2
100.0
Valid Percent
91.7
8.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
91.7
100.0
Q14A Provision of Children's Storytelling Area
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
15
93
135
243
1
244
Percent
6.1
38.1
55.3
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
6.2
38.3
55.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.2
44.4
100.0
Page 4
Q14B Provision of Young Adult Area
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
71
67
105
243
1
244
Percent
29.1
27.5
43.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
29.2
27.6
43.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
29.2
56.8
100.0
Q14C Provision of Specialist Genre Collection
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
134
54
55
243
1
244
Percent
54.9
22.1
22.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
55.1
22.2
22.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
55.1
77.4
100.0
Q14D Provision of Specialist Room, local and Family History
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
187
38
18
243
1
244
Percent
76.6
15.6
7.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
77.0
15.6
7.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
77.0
92.6
100.0
Q14E Provision of Multi-purpose Room
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
133
55
55
243
1
244
Percent
54.5
22.5
22.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
54.7
22.6
22.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
54.7
77.4
100.0
Q14F Provision of Bookshop, Coffeeshop, Gift Shop
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
240
2
1
243
1
244
Percent
98.4
.8
.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
98.8
.8
.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
98.8
99.6
100.0
Page 5
Q14G Provision of Toy Library
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
235
5
3
243
1
244
Percent
96.3
2.0
1.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
96.7
2.1
1.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
96.7
98.8
100.0
Q14H Provision of Community Services, Bank Services, Council Customer Service
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
208
12
23
243
1
244
Percent
85.2
4.9
9.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
85.6
4.9
9.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
85.6
90.5
100.0
Q14I Provision of Storage Area for Archival Materials
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
175
43
25
243
1
244
Percent
71.7
17.6
10.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
72.0
17.7
10.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
72.0
89.7
100.0
Q14J Provision of Office Space
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
54
164
25
243
1
244
Percent
22.1
67.2
10.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
67.5
10.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
89.7
100.0
Q14K Provision of Exhibition Space
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
144
22
77
243
1
244
Percent
59.0
9.0
31.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
59.3
9.1
31.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
59.3
68.3
100.0
Page 6
Q14L Provision of Mobile Library Services Area
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
225
5
13
243
1
244
Percent
92.2
2.0
5.3
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
92.6
2.1
5.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
92.6
94.7
100.0
Q14M Provision of Computer Lab/ Internet Area
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
52
90
101
243
1
244
Percent
21.3
36.9
41.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
21.4
37.0
41.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
21.4
58.4
100.0
Q14N Provision of Wireless Internet
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
220
6
17
243
1
244
Percent
90.2
2.5
7.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
90.5
2.5
7.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
90.5
93.0
100.0
Q14O Provision of Staff Lunchroom
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
48
137
58
243
1
244
Percent
19.7
56.1
23.8
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
19.8
56.4
23.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
19.8
76.1
100.0
Q14P Provision of Other Space - Shared or Exclusive?
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
220
18
5
243
1
244
Percent
90.2
7.4
2.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
90.5
7.4
2.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
90.5
97.9
100.0
Page 7
Q14Q Provision of Other Space - Shared or Exclusive?
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes, Exclusive
Yes, Shared
Total
System
Frequency
30
4
2
36
208
244
Percent
12.3
1.6
.8
14.8
85.2
100.0
Valid Percent
83.3
11.1
5.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
83.3
94.4
100.0
Q15 Ability to divide multi-purpose areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Have Any
Total
System
Frequency
37
150
56
243
1
244
Percent
15.2
61.5
23.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
15.2
61.7
23.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
15.2
77.0
100.0
Q16A Co-located/ Integrated?
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No Freestanding
Total
System
Frequency
127
116
243
1
244
Percent
52.0
47.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
52.3
47.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
52.3
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Private sector businesses (eg shops)
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
13
114
127
117
244
Percent
5.3
46.7
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
10.2
89.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
10.2
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Child care
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
6
121
127
117
244
Percent
2.5
49.6
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
4.7
95.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.7
100.0
Page 8
Q16B Other Uses - Community centre
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
22
105
127
117
244
Percent
9.0
43.0
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
17.3
82.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
17.3
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Youth centre
Valid
Missing
Total
No
System
Frequency
127
117
244
Percent
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Community health centre
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
6
121
127
117
244
Percent
2.5
49.6
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
4.7
95.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.7
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Council one stop shop services
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
42
85
127
117
244
Percent
17.2
34.8
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.1
66.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.1
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Other Local Government service (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
55
72
127
117
244
Percent
22.5
29.5
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
43.3
56.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
43.3
100.0
Page 9
Q16B Other Uses - Other State Government service (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
14
113
127
117
244
Percent
5.7
46.3
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
11.0
89.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
11.0
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Other Federal Government service (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
1
126
127
117
244
Percent
.4
51.6
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
.8
99.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.8
100.0
Q16B Other Uses - Other Service (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
43
84
127
117
244
Percent
17.6
34.4
52.0
48.0
100.0
Valid Percent
33.9
66.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
33.9
100.0
Q16C Percentage Area Dedicated to Library Functions (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<25
25 - 49
50 - 74
75 - 89
90+
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
22
44
30
16
15
1
128
116
244
Percent
9.0
18.0
12.3
6.6
6.1
.4
52.5
47.5
100.0
Valid Percent
17.2
34.4
23.4
12.5
11.7
.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
17.2
51.6
75.0
87.5
99.2
100.0
Q17A Joint use or mulit use facility?
Valid
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
24
220
244
Percent
9.8
90.2
100.0
Valid Percent
9.8
90.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
9.8
100.0
Page 10
Q18A Owner of Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Council
Crown Land
Private Owner
State Government
Body (Specified)
Community (eg via
Trustee) (Specified)
RSL
Private School
(Specified)
Total
System
Frequency
202
5
26
Percent
82.8
2.0
10.7
Valid Percent
83.1
2.1
10.7
Cumulative
Percent
83.1
85.2
95.9
6
2.5
2.5
98.4
2
.8
.8
99.2
1
.4
.4
99.6
1
.4
.4
100.0
243
1
244
99.6
.4
100.0
100.0
Q18B Leasor of Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Leased
Council
Private Owner
Other, Specify
Council provides building
free to Library Service
Total
System
Frequency
54
19
3
5
Percent
22.1
7.8
1.2
2.0
Valid Percent
56.3
19.8
3.1
5.2
Cumulative
Percent
56.3
76.0
79.2
84.4
15
6.1
15.6
100.0
96
148
244
39.3
60.7
100.0
100.0
Q18C Cost of Lease (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 999
2500 - 4999
5000 - 9999
10000 - 24999
25000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000 +
Data not provided
Total
System
Frequency
23
4
2
3
3
4
3
4
3
49
195
244
Percent
9.4
1.6
.8
1.2
1.2
1.6
1.2
1.6
1.2
20.1
79.9
100.0
Valid Percent
46.9
8.2
4.1
6.1
6.1
8.2
6.1
8.2
6.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
46.9
55.1
59.2
65.3
71.4
79.6
85.7
93.9
100.0
Page 11
Q18C Outgoings included in Lease?
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Data not provided
Total
System
Frequency
7
30
12
49
195
244
Percent
2.9
12.3
4.9
20.1
79.9
100.0
Valid Percent
14.3
61.2
24.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
14.3
75.5
100.0
Q19 Year original building constructed
Valid
Missing
Total
pre 1900
1900-1919
1920-1939
1940-1959
1960-1979
1980-1989
1990-2000
post 2000
Total
System
Frequency
18
6
14
20
81
42
31
31
243
1
244
Percent
7.4
2.5
5.7
8.2
33.2
17.2
12.7
12.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
7.4
2.5
5.8
8.2
33.3
17.3
12.8
12.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
7.4
9.9
15.6
23.9
57.2
74.5
87.2
100.0
Q20 Heritage Listed Building?
Valid
Yes
No
Data not provided
Total
Frequency
30
212
2
244
Percent
12.3
86.9
.8
100.0
Valid Percent
12.3
86.9
.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.3
99.2
100.0
Q21A Purpose Built Building?
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
147
96
243
1
244
Percent
60.2
39.3
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
60.5
39.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
60.5
100.0
Page 12
Q21B Year Library Established in Building (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
< 1900
1950 - 1969
1970 - 1979
1980 - 1989
1990 - 1999
2000 - 2004
2005+
Data not provided
Total
System
Frequency
1
6
12
15
32
11
12
6
95
149
244
Percent
.4
2.5
4.9
6.1
13.1
4.5
4.9
2.5
38.9
61.1
100.0
Valid Percent
1.1
6.3
12.6
15.8
33.7
11.6
12.6
6.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
1.1
7.4
20.0
35.8
69.5
81.1
93.7
100.0
Q21C Original Purpose of Building - Unknown
Valid
Missing
Total
Unknown
Known
Total
System
Frequency
5
91
96
148
244
Percent
2.0
37.3
39.3
60.7
100.0
Valid Percent
5.2
94.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
5.2
100.0
Q22A Year of Last Major Building Refurbishment (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
No Refurbishment
Refurbished, Date
Unknown
1970 - 1979
1980 - 1989
1990 - 1999
2000 - 2004
2005+
Total
System
Frequency
96
Percent
39.3
Valid Percent
41.4
Cumulative
Percent
41.4
5
2.0
2.2
43.5
2
5
37
51
36
232
12
244
.8
2.0
15.2
20.9
14.8
95.1
4.9
100.0
.9
2.2
15.9
22.0
15.5
100.0
44.4
46.6
62.5
84.5
100.0
Page 13
Q22A Cost of last refurbishmnet (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
<50000
50000 - 99999
100000 - 249999
250000 - 499999
500000 - 749999
750000 - 999999
1000000 - 1499999
1500000 - 1999999
2000000+
Total
System
Frequency
27
20
11
26
19
8
7
8
5
6
137
107
244
Percent
11.1
8.2
4.5
10.7
7.8
3.3
2.9
3.3
2.0
2.5
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
19.7
14.6
8.0
19.0
13.9
5.8
5.1
5.8
3.6
4.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
19.7
34.3
42.3
61.3
75.2
81.0
86.1
92.0
95.6
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Internal reorganisation of space
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
31
106
137
107
244
Percent
12.7
43.4
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
22.6
77.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.6
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Additional floor space
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
76
61
137
107
244
Percent
31.1
25.0
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
55.5
44.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
55.5
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Decreased floor space
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
131
6
137
107
244
Percent
53.7
2.5
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
95.6
4.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
95.6
100.0
Page 14
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Internal structural alterations
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
43
94
137
107
244
Percent
17.6
38.5
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
31.4
68.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
31.4
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved collection areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
56
81
137
107
244
Percent
23.0
33.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
40.9
59.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
40.9
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved reading and study areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
62
75
137
107
244
Percent
25.4
30.7
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
45.3
54.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
45.3
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved resource areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
62
75
137
107
244
Percent
25.4
30.7
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
45.3
54.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
45.3
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved staff areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
73
64
137
107
244
Percent
29.9
26.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
53.3
46.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
53.3
100.0
Page 15
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved amenities areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
89
48
137
107
244
Percent
36.5
19.7
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
65.0
35.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
65.0
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improvements to other areas (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
127
10
137
107
244
Percent
52.0
4.1
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
92.7
7.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
92.7
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved shelving
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
59
78
137
107
244
Percent
24.2
32.0
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
43.1
56.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
43.1
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Building services upgrade
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
116
21
137
107
244
Percent
47.5
8.6
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
84.7
15.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
84.7
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Fire safety improvements
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
101
36
137
107
244
Percent
41.4
14.8
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
73.7
26.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
73.7
100.0
Page 16
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Improved disabled access
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
68
69
137
107
244
Percent
27.9
28.3
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
49.6
50.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
49.6
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Energy consumption improvements
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
117
20
137
107
244
Percent
48.0
8.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
85.4
14.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
85.4
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Increased computer access
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
72
65
137
107
244
Percent
29.5
26.6
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
52.6
47.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
52.6
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Wireless internet
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
133
4
137
107
244
Percent
54.5
1.6
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
97.1
2.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
97.1
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Carpeting or other floor covering
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
36
101
137
107
244
Percent
14.8
41.4
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
26.3
73.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
26.3
100.0
Page 17
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Painting
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
31
106
137
107
244
Percent
12.7
43.4
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
22.6
77.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.6
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Building materials - external cladding
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
112
25
137
107
244
Percent
45.9
10.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
81.8
18.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
81.8
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Heating
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
86
51
137
107
244
Percent
35.2
20.9
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
62.8
37.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
62.8
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Air Conditioning
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
76
61
137
107
244
Percent
31.1
25.0
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
55.5
44.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
55.5
100.0
Q22B Refurbishment Undertaken - Other Works (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Undertaken
Undertaken
Total
System
Frequency
112
25
137
107
244
Percent
45.9
10.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
81.8
18.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
81.8
100.0
Page 18
Q23 Compliance Audit with BCA - Last 5 Years
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Know
Total
System
Frequency
137
80
26
243
1
244
Percent
56.1
32.8
10.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
56.4
89.3
100.0
Valid Percent
56.4
32.9
10.7
100.0
Q23 Year BCA Compliance Audit undertaken
Valid
Missing
Total
Year not provided
1998
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total
System
Frequency
26
5
1
2
10
10
34
24
25
137
107
244
Percent
10.7
2.0
.4
.8
4.1
4.1
13.9
9.8
10.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
19.0
3.6
.7
1.5
7.3
7.3
24.8
17.5
18.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
19.0
22.6
23.4
24.8
32.1
39.4
64.2
81.8
100.0
Q23 Year BCA Compliance Audit undertaken (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Year not Provided
<2000
2000 - 2002
2003 - 2005
2006
2007
Total
System
Frequency
26
5
3
54
24
25
137
107
244
Percent
10.7
2.0
1.2
22.1
9.8
10.2
56.1
43.9
100.0
Valid Percent
19.0
3.6
2.2
39.4
17.5
18.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
19.0
22.6
24.8
64.2
81.8
100.0
Q24 Compliance with Fire Rating Assessments
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Haven't Undertaken
An Assessment
Don't Know
Total
System
Frequency
183
7
Percent
75.0
2.9
Valid Percent
75.3
2.9
Cumulative
Percent
75.3
78.2
35
14.3
14.4
92.6
18
243
1
244
7.4
99.6
.4
100.0
7.4
100.0
100.0
Page 19
Q25A Compliance with Access and Mobility Standards
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
161
31
50
1
243
1
244
Yes
No
Don't Know
No Requirement To
Total
System
Percent
66.0
12.7
20.5
.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
66.3
12.8
20.6
.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
66.3
79.0
99.6
100.0
Q25B Access Audit Undertaken
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Know
Total
System
Frequency
154
67
22
243
1
244
Percent
63.1
27.5
9.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
63.4
27.6
9.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
63.4
90.9
100.0
Q25B Year Access Audit Undertaken (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Year not Provided
<2000
2000 - 2002
2003 - 2005
2006
2007
Total
System
Frequency
20
11
16
52
45
11
155
89
244
Percent
8.2
4.5
6.6
21.3
18.4
4.5
63.5
36.5
100.0
Valid Percent
12.9
7.1
10.3
33.5
29.0
7.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
12.9
20.0
30.3
63.9
92.9
100.0
Q25C Main Entrance Wheelchair Accessible
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
224
19
243
1
244
Percent
91.8
7.8
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
92.2
7.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
92.2
100.0
Page 20
Q25D Are all levels wheelchair Accessible
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Not over more
than one level
Data not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
27
7
Percent
11.1
2.9
Valid Percent
11.1
2.9
Cumulative
Percent
11.1
14.0
208
85.2
85.6
99.6
1
243
1
244
.4
99.6
.4
100.0
.4
100.0
100.0
Q25E Wheelchair Accessible parking near main entrance
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
167
75
242
2
244
Percent
68.4
30.7
99.2
.8
100.0
Valid Percent
69.0
31.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
69.0
100.0
Q25E Number of Wheelchair Accessible Parking Bays (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
1
2-4
5-9
10 +
Number Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
76
73
8
2
9
168
76
244
Percent
31.1
29.9
3.3
.8
3.7
68.9
31.1
100.0
Valid Percent
45.2
43.5
4.8
1.2
5.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
45.2
88.7
93.5
94.6
100.0
Q25F Aisle Space Provides Wheelchair Access
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
204
39
243
1
244
Percent
83.6
16.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
84.0
16.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
84.0
100.0
Q25G Wheelchair Accessible Toilet
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
176
67
243
1
244
Percent
72.1
27.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
72.4
27.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
72.4
100.0
Page 21
Q26 Rating of Building Lighting Levels
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
Total
System
Frequency
78
137
28
243
1
244
Percent
32.0
56.1
11.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
32.1
56.4
11.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.1
88.5
100.0
Q27A Rating of Internal Public Information Signage
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
Total
System
Frequency
35
154
54
243
1
244
Percent
14.3
63.1
22.1
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
14.4
63.4
22.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
14.4
77.8
100.0
Q27B Rating of External Public Information Signage
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
Total
System
Frequency
34
128
81
243
1
244
Percent
13.9
52.5
33.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
14.0
52.7
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
14.0
66.7
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Natural light
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
46
197
243
1
244
Percent
18.9
80.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
18.9
81.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
18.9
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Energy efficient light globes
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
176
67
243
1
244
Percent
72.1
27.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
72.4
27.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
72.4
100.0
Page 22
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Solar panels
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
239
4
243
1
244
Percent
98.0
1.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
98.4
1.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
98.4
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Water efficient taps
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
222
21
243
1
244
Percent
91.0
8.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
91.4
8.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
91.4
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Grey water usage
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
242
1
243
1
244
Percent
99.2
.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
99.6
.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
99.6
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Energy efficient air-conditioning/heating
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
206
37
243
1
244
Percent
84.4
15.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
84.8
15.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
84.8
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Facilities for recycling
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
78
165
243
1
244
Percent
32.0
67.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
32.1
67.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.1
100.0
Page 23
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Dual flush toilets
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
107
136
243
1
244
No
Yes
Total
System
Percent
43.9
55.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
44.0
56.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
44.0
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Cycle parking or secure storage
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
139
104
243
1
244
No
Yes
Total
System
Percent
57.0
42.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
57.2
42.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
57.2
100.0
Q28A Provides Energy Reduction Measure - Other (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
227
16
243
1
244
No
Yes
Total
System
Percent
93.0
6.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
93.4
6.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
93.4
100.0
Q28B Energy Audit Undertaken
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Know
Total
System
Frequency
62
122
59
243
1
244
Percent
25.4
50.0
24.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
25.5
50.2
24.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
25.5
75.7
100.0
Q28B Year Energy Audit Undertaken (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<2000
2000 - 2002
2003 - 2005
2006
2007
Year Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
3
8
16
18
8
9
62
182
244
Percent
1.2
3.3
6.6
7.4
3.3
3.7
25.4
74.6
100.0
Valid Percent
4.8
12.9
25.8
29.0
12.9
14.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
4.8
17.7
43.5
72.6
85.5
100.0
Page 24
Q29 Electricity Expenditure per Quarter (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 999
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000+
Total
System
Frequency
13
37
35
47
27
18
6
3
186
58
244
Percent
5.3
15.2
14.3
19.3
11.1
7.4
2.5
1.2
76.2
23.8
100.0
Valid Percent
7.0
19.9
18.8
25.3
14.5
9.7
3.2
1.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
7.0
26.9
45.7
71.0
85.5
95.2
98.4
100.0
Q29 Gas Expenditure per Quarter (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 249
250 - 499
500 - 749
750 - 999
1000 - 1499
1500 - 1999
2000+
Total
System
Frequency
18
16
8
4
7
16
4
12
85
159
244
Percent
7.4
6.6
3.3
1.6
2.9
6.6
1.6
4.9
34.8
65.2
100.0
Valid Percent
21.2
18.8
9.4
4.7
8.2
18.8
4.7
14.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
21.2
40.0
49.4
54.1
62.4
81.2
85.9
100.0
Q29 Water Expenditure per Quarter (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
0
1 - 249
250 - 499
500 - 749
750 - 999
1000 - 1499
1500 - 1999
2000+
Total
System
Frequency
14
66
28
18
9
9
2
8
154
90
244
Percent
5.7
27.0
11.5
7.4
3.7
3.7
.8
3.3
63.1
36.9
100.0
Valid Percent
9.1
42.9
18.2
11.7
5.8
5.8
1.3
5.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
9.1
51.9
70.1
81.8
87.7
93.5
94.8
100.0
Page 25
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Security alarm
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
75
168
243
1
244
Percent
30.7
68.9
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
30.9
69.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
30.9
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Access control (proximity access card)
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
201
42
243
1
244
Percent
82.4
17.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
82.7
17.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
82.7
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Management plan / procedures manual
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
60
183
243
1
244
Percent
24.6
75.0
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
24.7
75.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.7
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Staff training
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
51
192
243
1
244
Percent
20.9
78.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
21.0
79.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
21.0
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - External lighting
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
34
209
243
1
244
Percent
13.9
85.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
14.0
86.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
14.0
100.0
Page 26
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Clearly marked fire exits
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
15
228
243
1
244
Percent
6.1
93.4
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
6.2
93.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.2
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Fire extinguishers
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
9
234
243
1
244
Percent
3.7
95.9
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
3.7
96.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.7
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Parking close to entry
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
46
197
243
1
244
Percent
18.9
80.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
18.9
81.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
18.9
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Well lit book return chutes
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
119
124
243
1
244
Percent
48.8
50.8
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
49.0
51.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
49.0
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Fire alarms
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
106
137
243
1
244
Percent
43.4
56.1
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
43.6
56.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
43.6
100.0
Page 27
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Sprinkler systems
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
193
50
243
1
244
Percent
79.1
20.5
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
79.4
20.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
79.4
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Fire proof book return chutes
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
192
51
243
1
244
Percent
78.7
20.9
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
79.0
21.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
79.0
100.0
Q30 Provides Security Measure - Other (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
228
15
243
1
244
Percent
93.4
6.1
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
93.8
6.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
93.8
100.0
Q31 Rating of Safety and Security Measures
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Poor
Total
System
Frequency
33
191
18
242
2
244
Percent
13.5
78.3
7.4
99.2
.8
100.0
Valid Percent
13.6
78.9
7.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
13.6
92.6
100.0
Q32A Compliance with OH&S Standards
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Know
Haven't undertaken
an Audit
Total
System
Frequency
165
6
55
Percent
67.6
2.5
22.5
Valid Percent
67.9
2.5
22.6
Cumulative
Percent
67.9
70.4
93.0
17
7.0
7.0
100.0
243
1
244
99.6
.4
100.0
100.0
Page 28
Q32B OH&S Audit Undertaken
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Know
Total
System
Frequency
163
16
64
243
1
244
Percent
66.8
6.6
26.2
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
67.1
6.6
26.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
67.1
73.7
100.0
Q32B Year of OH&S Audit (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
2000 - 2002
2003 - 2005
2006
2007
No Date Provided
Total
System
Frequency
2
28
62
68
3
163
81
244
Percent
.8
11.5
25.4
27.9
1.2
66.8
33.2
100.0
Valid Percent
1.2
17.2
38.0
41.7
1.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
1.2
18.4
56.4
98.2
100.0
Q33A Rating of Building
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Total
System
Frequency
62
134
47
243
1
244
Percent
25.4
54.9
19.3
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
25.5
55.1
19.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
25.5
80.7
100.0
Q33B Rating of Internal Layout and Design
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Total
System
Frequency
59
135
48
242
2
244
Percent
24.2
55.3
19.7
99.2
.8
100.0
Valid Percent
24.4
55.8
19.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.4
80.2
100.0
Q33C Rating of Overal Standard of Library
Valid
Missing
Total
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Total
System
Frequency
77
140
25
242
2
244
Percent
31.6
57.4
10.2
99.2
.8
100.0
Valid Percent
31.8
57.9
10.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
31.8
89.7
100.0
Page 29
Q34 Proximity to a shopping centre
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
34
65
118
217
27
244
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Percent
13.9
26.6
48.4
88.9
11.1
100.0
Valid Percent
15.7
30.0
54.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
15.7
45.6
100.0
Q34 Proximity to a shopping or business precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
70
130
36
236
8
244
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Percent
28.7
53.3
14.8
96.7
3.3
100.0
Valid Percent
29.7
55.1
15.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
29.7
84.7
100.0
Q34 Proximity to a main street
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
117
103
17
237
7
244
Percent
48.0
42.2
7.0
97.1
2.9
100.0
Valid Percent
49.4
43.5
7.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
49.4
92.8
100.0
Q34 Proximity to a Council administration precinct
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
29
33
40
110
212
32
244
Percent
11.9
13.5
16.4
45.1
86.9
13.1
100.0
Valid Percent
13.7
15.6
18.9
51.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
13.7
29.2
48.1
100.0
Q34 Proximity to train station
Valid
Missing
Total
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
2
64
142
208
36
244
Percent
.8
26.2
58.2
85.2
14.8
100.0
Valid Percent
1.0
30.8
68.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
1.0
31.7
100.0
Page 30
Q34 Proximity to bus stop
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
31
149
44
224
20
244
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Percent
12.7
61.1
18.0
91.8
8.2
100.0
Valid Percent
13.8
66.5
19.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
13.8
80.4
100.0
Q34 Proximity to cultural facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
13
32
56
105
206
38
244
Percent
5.3
13.1
23.0
43.0
84.4
15.6
100.0
Valid Percent
6.3
15.5
27.2
51.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.3
21.8
49.0
100.0
Q34 Proximity to car parking
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
1
211
21
5
238
6
244
Percent
.4
86.5
8.6
2.0
97.5
2.5
100.0
Valid Percent
.4
88.7
8.8
2.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.4
89.1
97.9
100.0
Q34 Proximity to eating facilities
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
7
49
161
21
238
6
244
Percent
2.9
20.1
66.0
8.6
97.5
2.5
100.0
Valid Percent
2.9
20.6
67.6
8.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
23.5
91.2
100.0
Page 31
Q34 Proximity to school
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
4
10
98
97
209
35
244
Percent
1.6
4.1
40.2
39.8
85.7
14.3
100.0
Valid Percent
1.9
4.8
46.9
46.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
1.9
6.7
53.6
100.0
Q34 Proximity to recreation/ sporting facility
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
3
25
82
103
213
31
244
Percent
1.2
10.2
33.6
42.2
87.3
12.7
100.0
Valid Percent
1.4
11.7
38.5
48.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
1.4
13.1
51.6
100.0
Q34 Proximity to parks and gardens
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
49
97
75
221
23
244
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Percent
20.1
39.8
30.7
90.6
9.4
100.0
Valid Percent
22.2
43.9
33.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.2
66.1
100.0
Q34 Proximity to other facility (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Within Building
Adjacent
Within 400m
N/A
Total
System
Frequency
4
16
12
43
75
169
244
Percent
1.6
6.6
4.9
17.6
30.7
69.3
100.0
Valid Percent
5.3
21.3
16.0
57.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
5.3
26.7
42.7
100.0
Q35A Car Parking Nearby
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
234
9
243
1
244
Percent
95.9
3.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
96.3
3.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
96.3
100.0
Page 32
Q35A Number of Car Parking Spaces (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
1-4
5-9
10 - 49
50 - 99
100+
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
8
17
96
40
54
19
234
10
244
Percent
3.3
7.0
39.3
16.4
22.1
7.8
95.9
4.1
100.0
Valid Percent
3.4
7.3
41.0
17.1
23.1
8.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.4
10.7
51.7
68.8
91.9
100.0
Q35B Car parking Free or Paid
Valid
Missing
Total
Free
Paid
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
231
9
1
241
3
244
Percent
94.7
3.7
.4
98.8
1.2
100.0
Valid Percent
95.9
3.7
.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
95.9
99.6
100.0
Q35C Car parks solely for library patrons (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
1-4
5-9
10 - 49
50 - 99
100+
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
94
8
22
4
2
111
241
3
244
Percent
38.5
3.3
9.0
1.6
.8
45.5
98.8
1.2
100.0
Valid Percent
39.0
3.3
9.1
1.7
.8
46.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
39.0
42.3
51.5
53.1
53.9
100.0
Q35D Adequacy of car parking near library
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Total
System
Frequency
173
67
240
4
244
Percent
70.9
27.5
98.4
1.6
100.0
Valid Percent
72.1
27.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
72.1
100.0
Page 33
Q35E Staff Car Parks (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Frequency
136
20
35
28
13
6
238
6
244
0
1
2-4
5-9
10 - 19
20+
Total
System
Percent
55.7
8.2
14.3
11.5
5.3
2.5
97.5
2.5
100.0
Valid Percent
57.1
8.4
14.7
11.8
5.5
2.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
57.1
65.5
80.3
92.0
97.5
100.0
Q36A Extent of Asset Managment Plan (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
1
3-4
5-9
10 - 19
20+
Data not provided
Total
System
Frequency
1
8
59
15
30
23
136
108
244
Percent
.4
3.3
24.2
6.1
12.3
9.4
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
.7
5.9
43.4
11.0
22.1
16.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.7
6.6
50.0
61.0
83.1
100.0
Q36A Asset Management Plan
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Don't Know
Total
System
Frequency
136
86
21
243
1
244
Percent
55.7
35.2
8.6
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
56.0
35.4
8.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
56.0
91.4
100.0
Q36A Extent of Asset Managment Plan
Valid
Missing
Total
1
3
5
6
10
20
25
Data not provided
Total
System
Frequency
1
8
58
1
15
17
13
23
136
108
244
Percent
.4
3.3
23.8
.4
6.1
7.0
5.3
9.4
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
.7
5.9
42.6
.7
11.0
12.5
9.6
16.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
.7
6.6
49.3
50.0
61.0
73.5
83.1
100.0
Page 34
Q36B New building Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
124
12
136
108
244
Percent
50.8
4.9
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
91.2
8.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
91.2
100.0
Q36B Year New building Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2006
2007
2010
2012
2013
2016
Total
System
Frequency
5
2
1
1
1
1
1
12
232
244
Percent
2.0
.8
.4
.4
.4
.4
.4
4.9
95.1
100.0
Valid Percent
41.7
16.7
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
41.7
58.3
66.7
75.0
83.3
91.7
100.0
Q36B Closure Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
131
5
136
108
244
Percent
53.7
2.0
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
96.3
3.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
96.3
100.0
Q36B Year Closure Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
2007
System
Frequency
1
243
244
Percent
.4
99.6
100.0
Valid Percent
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
Q36B Relocation Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
130
6
136
108
244
Percent
53.3
2.5
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
95.6
4.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
95.6
100.0
Page 35
Q36B Year Relocation Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2009
Total
System
Frequency
4
2
6
238
244
Percent
1.6
.8
2.5
97.5
100.0
Valid Percent
66.7
33.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
66.7
100.0
Q36B Refurbishment of existing building Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
101
33
134
110
244
Percent
41.4
13.5
54.9
45.1
100.0
Valid Percent
75.4
24.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
75.4
100.0
Q36B Year Refurbishment Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2000
2006
2007
2008
2015
2022
Total
System
Frequency
20
1
1
6
3
1
1
33
211
244
Percent
8.2
.4
.4
2.5
1.2
.4
.4
13.5
86.5
100.0
Valid Percent
60.6
3.0
3.0
18.2
9.1
3.0
3.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
60.6
63.6
66.7
84.8
93.9
97.0
100.0
Q36B Extensions Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
124
12
136
108
244
Percent
50.8
4.9
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
91.2
8.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
91.2
100.0
Q36B Year Extensions Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2007
2008
2013
Total
System
Frequency
9
1
1
1
12
232
244
Percent
3.7
.4
.4
.4
4.9
95.1
100.0
Valid Percent
75.0
8.3
8.3
8.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
75.0
83.3
91.7
100.0
Page 36
Q36B Maintenance Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
50
86
136
108
244
Percent
20.5
35.2
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
36.8
63.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
36.8
100.0
Q36B Year Maintenance Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2006
2007
2008
2010
2012
2013
2014
2015
Total
System
Frequency
56
1
12
5
4
3
1
1
3
86
158
244
Percent
23.0
.4
4.9
2.0
1.6
1.2
.4
.4
1.2
35.2
64.8
100.0
Valid Percent
65.1
1.2
14.0
5.8
4.7
3.5
1.2
1.2
3.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
65.1
66.3
80.2
86.0
90.7
94.2
95.3
96.5
100.0
Q36B Other Works Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
No
Yes
Total
System
Frequency
118
18
136
108
244
Percent
48.4
7.4
55.7
44.3
100.0
Valid Percent
86.8
13.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
86.8
100.0
Q36B Year Other Works Planned
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2007
2008
Total
System
Frequency
11
6
1
18
226
244
Percent
4.5
2.5
.4
7.4
92.6
100.0
Valid Percent
61.1
33.3
5.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
61.1
94.4
100.0
Page 37
Q36B Year New building Planned (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2006
2007
2010 - 2014
2015+
Total
System
Frequency
5
2
1
3
1
12
232
244
Percent
2.0
.8
.4
1.2
.4
4.9
95.1
100.0
Valid Percent
41.7
16.7
8.3
25.0
8.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
41.7
58.3
66.7
91.7
100.0
Q36B Year Refurbishment Planned (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
<2006
2006
2007
2008 - 2009
2015+
Total
System
Frequency
20
1
1
6
3
2
33
211
244
Percent
8.2
.4
.4
2.5
1.2
.8
13.5
86.5
100.0
Valid Percent
60.6
3.0
3.0
18.2
9.1
6.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
60.6
63.6
66.7
84.8
93.9
100.0
Q36B Year Extensions Planned (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2007
2008 - 2009
2010 - 2014
Total
System
Frequency
9
1
1
1
12
232
244
Percent
3.7
.4
.4
.4
4.9
95.1
100.0
Valid Percent
75.0
8.3
8.3
8.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
75.0
83.3
91.7
100.0
Q36B Year Maintenance Planned (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Stated
2006
2007
2008 - 2009
2010 - 2014
2015+
Total
System
Frequency
56
1
12
5
9
3
86
158
244
Percent
23.0
.4
4.9
2.0
3.7
1.2
35.2
64.8
100.0
Valid Percent
65.1
1.2
14.0
5.8
10.5
3.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
65.1
66.3
80.2
86.0
96.5
100.0
Page 38
Q37 Total Insurance Value of Building (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<250000
250000 - 499999
500000 - 749999
750000 - 999999
1000000 - 1499999
1500000 - 1999999
2000000 - 2999999
3000000+
Total
System
Frequency
17
15
14
10
25
19
23
46
169
75
244
Percent
7.0
6.1
5.7
4.1
10.2
7.8
9.4
18.9
69.3
30.7
100.0
Valid Percent
10.1
8.9
8.3
5.9
14.8
11.2
13.6
27.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
10.1
18.9
27.2
33.1
47.9
59.2
72.8
100.0
Q37 Date of Insurance Assessment
Valid
Missing
Total
Unknown
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total
System
Frequency
39
4
11
52
63
169
75
244
Percent
16.0
1.6
4.5
21.3
25.8
69.3
30.7
100.0
Valid Percent
23.1
2.4
6.5
30.8
37.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
23.1
25.4
32.0
62.7
100.0
Q38 Average Annual Maintenance Cost ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000 - 19999
20000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000+
Total
System
Frequency
8
13
13
23
17
19
20
66
22
9
210
34
244
Percent
3.3
5.3
5.3
9.4
7.0
7.8
8.2
27.0
9.0
3.7
86.1
13.9
100.0
Valid Percent
3.8
6.2
6.2
11.0
8.1
9.0
9.5
31.4
10.5
4.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.8
10.0
16.2
27.1
35.2
44.3
53.8
85.2
95.7
100.0
Page 39
Q38 Average Annual Cleaning Cost ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000 - 19999
20000 - 49999
50000+
Total
System
Frequency
6
16
19
30
17
21
22
41
1
173
71
244
Percent
2.5
6.6
7.8
12.3
7.0
8.6
9.0
16.8
.4
70.9
29.1
100.0
Valid Percent
3.5
9.2
11.0
17.3
9.8
12.1
12.7
23.7
.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.5
12.7
23.7
41.0
50.9
63.0
75.7
99.4
100.0
Q38 Average Annual Cost of Unplanned Maintenance Work ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000 - 19999
20000 - 49999
50000+
Total
System
Frequency
29
29
26
19
2
8
8
4
1
126
118
244
Percent
11.9
11.9
10.7
7.8
.8
3.3
3.3
1.6
.4
51.6
48.4
100.0
Valid Percent
23.0
23.0
20.6
15.1
1.6
6.3
6.3
3.2
.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
23.0
46.0
66.7
81.7
83.3
89.7
96.0
99.2
100.0
Q38 Average Annual Cost of Planned preventative maintenance work ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000 - 19999
20000 - 49999
50000+
Total
System
Frequency
6
32
17
10
6
10
7
6
1
95
149
244
Percent
2.5
13.1
7.0
4.1
2.5
4.1
2.9
2.5
.4
38.9
61.1
100.0
Valid Percent
6.3
33.7
17.9
10.5
6.3
10.5
7.4
6.3
1.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.3
40.0
57.9
68.4
74.7
85.3
92.6
98.9
100.0
Page 40
Q38 Average Annual Cost - Planned works program costs (condition-based) ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<500.0
1000.0 - 2499.0
2500.0 - 4999.0
5000.0 - 7499.0
7500.0 - 9999.0
10000.0 - 14999.0
20000.0 - 49999.0
50000.0+
Total
System
Frequency
3
14
2
8
4
7
7
1
46
198
244
Percent
1.2
5.7
.8
3.3
1.6
2.9
2.9
.4
18.9
81.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.5
37.0
41.3
58.7
67.4
82.6
97.8
100.0
Valid Percent
6.5
30.4
4.3
17.4
8.7
15.2
15.2
2.2
100.0
Q38 Average Annual Cost - Major plant and equipment replacement ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000 - 19999
20000 - 49999
100000+
Total
System
Frequency
2
5
4
3
2
2
8
1
4
31
213
244
Percent
.8
2.0
1.6
1.2
.8
.8
3.3
.4
1.6
12.7
87.3
100.0
Valid Percent
6.5
16.1
12.9
9.7
6.5
6.5
25.8
3.2
12.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.5
22.6
35.5
45.2
51.6
58.1
83.9
87.1
100.0
Q38 Average Annual Cost of Other Maintenance Expense ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1000
1000 - 2499
2500 - 4999
5000 - 7499
7500 - 9999
10000 - 14999
15000 - 19999
20000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
Total
System
Frequency
2
3
2
4
1
2
3
3
1
21
223
244
Percent
.8
1.2
.8
1.6
.4
.8
1.2
1.2
.4
8.6
91.4
100.0
Valid Percent
9.5
14.3
9.5
19.0
4.8
9.5
14.3
14.3
4.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
9.5
23.8
33.3
52.4
57.1
66.7
81.0
95.2
100.0
Page 41
Q39 Estimated Backlog of Planned Maintenance ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<500
1000 - 1999
2000 - 4999
5000 - 9999
10000 - 24999
25000+
Total
System
Frequency
1
3
7
7
9
18
45
199
244
Percent
.4
1.2
2.9
2.9
3.7
7.4
18.4
81.6
100.0
Valid Percent
2.2
6.7
15.6
15.6
20.0
40.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
2.2
8.9
24.4
40.0
60.0
100.0
Q40 Capital Expenditure (2006/07) ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<10000
1000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000 - 249999
250000+
Total
System
Frequency
36
34
9
3
7
89
155
244
Percent
14.8
13.9
3.7
1.2
2.9
36.5
63.5
100.0
Valid Percent
40.4
38.2
10.1
3.4
7.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
40.4
78.7
88.8
92.1
100.0
Q41 Projected Capital Expenditure (2007/08) ($) (Banded)
Valid
Missing
Total
<10000
1000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000 - 249999
250000+
Total
System
Frequency
27
28
8
6
7
76
168
244
Percent
11.1
11.5
3.3
2.5
2.9
31.1
68.9
100.0
Valid Percent
35.5
36.8
10.5
7.9
9.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
35.5
72.4
82.9
90.8
100.0
Q42 Interval of Regular building Surveys
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Done
< 5 Years
2 - 5 Years
Every second year
Yearly
Several times a year
Total
System
Frequency
13
9
56
21
94
13
206
38
244
Percent
5.3
3.7
23.0
8.6
38.5
5.3
84.4
15.6
100.0
Valid Percent
6.3
4.4
27.2
10.2
45.6
6.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
6.3
10.7
37.9
48.1
93.7
100.0
Page 42
Q43A Requirement for Major Refurbishment/ Extension in next 5 years
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
60
170
13
243
1
244
Percent
24.6
69.7
5.3
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
24.7
70.0
5.3
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.7
94.7
100.0
Q43B Capability of Accommodating any Expansion
Valid
Missing
Total
Yes
No
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
122
107
14
243
1
244
Percent
50.0
43.9
5.7
99.6
.4
100.0
Valid Percent
50.2
44.0
5.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.2
94.2
100.0
Q44A Type of Alterations Planned
Frequency
Valid
Refurbishment of
Existing Branch
Demolition and
Replacement - On Site
Replacement and
Relocation to new Site
Yes, Unstated
No
Not Stated
Total
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
24
9.8
9.8
9.8
8
3.3
3.3
13.1
17
7.0
7.0
20.1
3
182
10
244
1.2
74.6
4.1
100.0
1.2
74.6
4.1
100.0
21.3
95.9
100.0
Q44B Timeframe of Alterations
Valid
Missing
Total
< 2 years
2 - 4 years
> 4 years
Unstated
Total
System
Frequency
22
13
16
1
52
192
244
Percent
9.0
5.3
6.6
.4
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
42.3
25.0
30.8
1.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
42.3
67.3
98.1
100.0
Page 43
Q44C Proposed Additional Floor space (m2)
Valid
Missing
Total
<1
1 - 49
50 - 149
150 - 299
300 - 499
500 - 999
1000 +
Not Stated
Total
System
Frequency
17
1
4
6
5
4
9
6
52
192
244
Percent
7.0
.4
1.6
2.5
2.0
1.6
3.7
2.5
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
32.7
1.9
7.7
11.5
9.6
7.7
17.3
11.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.7
34.6
42.3
53.8
63.5
71.2
88.5
100.0
Q44D Budget of Alterations - Capital Building (to nearest $100,000)
Valid
Missing
Total
<25000
25000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000 - 249999
250000 - 499999
500000 - 999999
1000000 - 1999999
2000000+
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
5
1
2
4
1
7
1
15
16
52
192
244
Percent
2.0
.4
.8
1.6
.4
2.9
.4
6.1
6.6
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
9.6
1.9
3.8
7.7
1.9
13.5
1.9
28.8
30.8
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
9.6
11.5
15.4
23.1
25.0
38.5
40.4
69.2
100.0
Q44D Budget of Alterations - Internal Assets (to nearest $100,000)
Valid
Missing
Total
<15000
15000 - 49999
50000 - 99999
100000 - 199999
200000 - 499999
500000+
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
4
5
4
5
4
6
24
52
192
244
Percent
1.6
2.0
1.6
2.0
1.6
2.5
9.8
21.3
78.7
100.0
Valid Percent
7.7
9.6
7.7
9.6
7.7
11.5
46.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
7.7
17.3
25.0
34.6
42.3
53.8
100.0
Page 44
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Internal reorganisation of space
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
12
29
9
50
194
244
Percent
4.9
11.9
3.7
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
24.0
58.0
18.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.0
82.0
100.0
Q44ERefurbishment Planned - Additional floor space
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
11
30
9
50
194
244
Percent
4.5
12.3
3.7
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
22.0
60.0
18.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.0
82.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Decreased floor space
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
40
10
50
194
244
Percent
16.4
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
80.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Internal structural alterations
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
23
17
10
50
194
244
Percent
9.4
7.0
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
46.0
34.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
46.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved collection areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
12
28
10
50
194
244
Percent
4.9
11.5
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
24.0
56.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.0
80.0
100.0
Page 45
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved reading and study areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
11
29
10
50
194
244
Percent
4.5
11.9
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
22.0
58.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
22.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved resource areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
15
25
10
50
194
244
Percent
6.1
10.2
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
30.0
50.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
30.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved staff areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
19
21
10
50
194
244
Percent
7.8
8.6
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
38.0
42.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
38.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved amenities areas
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
20
20
10
50
194
244
Percent
8.2
8.2
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
40.0
40.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
40.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improvements to other areas (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
32
8
10
50
194
244
Percent
13.1
3.3
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
64.0
16.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
64.0
80.0
100.0
Page 46
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved shelving
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
15
25
10
50
194
244
Percent
6.1
10.2
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
30.0
50.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
30.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Building services upgrade
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
33
7
10
50
194
244
Percent
13.5
2.9
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
66.0
14.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
66.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Fire safety improvements
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
24
16
10
50
194
244
Percent
9.8
6.6
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
48.0
32.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
48.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Improved disabled access
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
20
20
10
50
194
244
Percent
8.2
8.2
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
40.0
40.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
40.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Energy consumption improvements
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
21
19
10
50
194
244
Percent
8.6
7.8
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
42.0
38.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
42.0
80.0
100.0
Page 47
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Increased computer access
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
16
24
10
50
194
244
Percent
6.6
9.8
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
32.0
48.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Wireless internet
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
25
15
10
50
194
244
Percent
10.2
6.1
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
30.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Carpeting or other floor covering
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
13
27
10
50
194
244
Percent
5.3
11.1
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
26.0
54.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
26.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Painting
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
12
28
10
50
194
244
Percent
4.9
11.5
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
24.0
56.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
24.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Building materials - external cladding
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
28
12
10
50
194
244
Percent
11.5
4.9
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
56.0
24.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
56.0
80.0
100.0
Page 48
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Heating
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
25
15
10
50
194
244
Percent
10.2
6.1
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
50.0
30.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
50.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Air Conditioning
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
23
17
10
50
194
244
Percent
9.4
7.0
4.1
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
46.0
34.0
20.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
46.0
80.0
100.0
Q44E Refurbishment Planned - Other Works (specify)
Valid
Missing
Total
Not Planned
Planned
Data Not Provided
Total
System
Frequency
35
8
7
50
194
244
Percent
14.3
3.3
2.9
20.5
79.5
100.0
Valid Percent
70.0
16.0
14.0
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
70.0
86.0
100.0
Q45 Ability to Adapt Spaces for New Uses
Valid
Yes
No
Not Stated
Total
Frequency
57
172
15
244
Percent
23.4
70.5
6.1
100.0
Valid Percent
23.4
70.5
6.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
23.4
93.9
100.0
Page 49