Chandos Information Professional Series Series Editor: Ruth Rikowski (Email: firstname.lastname@example.org) Chandos’ new series of books is aimed at the busy information professional. They have been specially commissioned to provide the reader with an authoritative view of current thinking.They are designed to provide easy-toread and (most importantly) practical coverage of topics that are of interest to librarians and other information professionals. If you would like a full listing of current and forthcoming titles, please visit www.chandospublishing.com. New authors: We are always pleased to receive ideas for new titles; if you would like to write a book for Chandos, please contact Dr. Glyn Jones on email@example.com or telephone + 44 (0) 1865 843000.
LIBRARY STORAGE FACILITIES
From Planning to Construction to Operation
WYOMA VANDUINKERKEN, WENDI ARANT KASPAR, AND PAULA SULLENGER Texas A&M University Libraries, College Station, TX, United States
For information on all Chandos Publishing publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals
Publisher: Glyn Jones Acquisition Editor: Glyn Jones Editorial Project Manager: John Leonard Production Project Manager: Swapna Srinivasan Cover Designer: Greg Harris Typeset by TNQ Technologies
Section 1 Consideration and Planning
1.An Introduction to Storage Facilities: Types and Examples
1.1.Types of Storage Facilities 4 1.2.Storage Facilities in Practice 8 References14
2.Planning Strategically for a Storage Facility
2.1.Defining the Need and Making the Case for Proposed Concept 17 2.2.Environmental Scan 20 2.3.Identifying Partners and Stakeholders 23 2.4.Building Collaborations and Communication 24 2.5.Scoping the Project 26 2.6.Navigating the Bureaucracy, Approvals, and Funding 28 References30
Section 2 Building the Storage Facility
3.An Introduction to Construction Methods, Project Management, and Building a Project Team
3.1.Project Delivery Systems Appendix 3.1
4.Design and Construction of a Storage Facility Building
49 51 51 52 54 55 56 59 59 60
4.1.Repurposing a Building 4.2.Constructing a New Storage Facility Building 4.3.Project Site 4.4.Building Areas 4.5.Receiving Room 4.6.Interlibrary Loan Room 4.7.Materials Processing Room 4.8.Break Room 4.9.Stacks Area 4.10.Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning
6.Staffing the Storage Facility: Organization, Positions, Hiring, and Training
6.1.Framing Staff Responsibilities at the Transferring Library 100 6.2.Staffing the Remote Storage Facility 107 6.3.Other Organizational Considerations 115 Appendix 6.1 116 References119
7.Collection Management: Decisions and Selection for Remote Storage
7.1.Storage Facility Options 123 7.2.Collection Management and Remote Storage 124 7.3.Communications With Stakeholders 126 7.4.Shared Storage Holdings 127 7.5.Duplication in Storage facilities 130 References131
Section 4 Transferring and Receiving Materials
8.Moving Collections: The Process From Retrieval to Shipping
8.1.Staffing for the Project 135 8.2.Making Preparations for Transferring Materials: Space and Supply Requirements 137 8.3.Processing Items for Transfer to Remote Storage 138 8.4.Verifying Suitability for Remote Storage 140 8.5.Retrieval of Materials from the Stacks 142 8.6.Updating Cataloging Records 143 8.7.Shipping Materials to the Storage Facility 147 Appendix 8.1: List Structures for Sending Material to the Joint Library Facility 148 Appendix 8.2: Guidelines for Shipping and Delivery 150 Appendix 8.3: Transfer Processes Recommendations for Materials Going to the Joint Library Facility 151 References159
9.Receiving Materials and Workflow at Storage Facility
9.1.Preprocessing Materials Into the Storage Facility 161 9.2.Buying, Storing, and Building Trays 165 9.3.Materials Arriving Into the Storage Facility 169 9.4.Processing Items in a Storage Facility 170 9.5.Accessioning173 9.6.Shelving174 Appendix 9.1 175
Section 5 Sustain Operations
10.Sustainability and Safety of the Facility: Materials, Personnel, and the Institution
11.1.Interlibrary Loan 11.2.Reading Room With Reference Services 11.3.Other Potential Services 11.4.Secondary Site for Computer Files and Systems’ Backup 11.5.Planning for the Unexpected
195 202 203 204 204
12.Reporting Effectiveness, Return on Investment, and Preparing for Future Growth
12.1.Statistics and Reporting 207 12.2.Assessing Operational Effectiveness and Efficiency 210 12.3.Troubleshooting212 12.4.Reporting Return on Investment 214 12.5.Considering Growth 216 12.6.Marketing and Building Support 218 12.7.Conclusion218
Section 6 Case Studies
13.1.Case Study 1 13.2.Case Study 2
INTRODUCTION Over the past few years, institutions of higher education and academic libraries have seen change that is both profound and continuous. Colleges and universities are responding to demands to be more accountable and responsive to their community’s needs driven largely by technology. The shift to electronic platforms as a primary mode of information delivery has changed the research and information needs of clientele and the ways in which libraries provide for them. In spite of this trend, one sought-after resource is, surprisingly, physical space on campuses.While colleges and universities are expanding in the online arena, they are also expanding their institutions physically with new innovation spaces and efforts to accommodate a growing on-site population as well. Research and academic libraries are not exempt from this trend. Many not only want to repurpose their own spaces but also find themselves in defense of their existing footprint when so many other on-campus programs and initiatives are vying for more of their own. Despite the move toward digital-preferred collection development, many libraries continue to struggle with the space requirements to store their print collections and strive to meet the demand for more interactive, innovative, and collaborative library spaces. Wood and Walther (2000) believed that as libraries need to focus their attention away from the historic ownership of information but rather toward access to and management of information.1 This movement would allow libraries to create the space needed to accommodate the demands of their users and provide space for information commons. However, Heath reports that “the flow of printed resources continues unabated with no end in sight” and, as a result, academic libraries, such as the University of Texas—Austin, continue to add as many as 200,000 print volumes annually, which creates a shelving demand of almost 10,000 square feet of library space a year.2 This persistence in collecting print resources is not unusual, whether to continue to provide access to materials that are not online, which is true of materials for more interdisciplinary, specialized or niche programs or to sustain the commitment to archival access for future generations. There are academic programs where print and hard copy is desirable, particularly in literary criticism, historical analysis, or fields that study the book as an artifact.
Not all items are available electronically and sometimes the cost of acquiring electronic access outweighs the cost of getting the item in print, particularly if the electronic access is based on a license and annual fee. According to Hughes, despite the mass digitization efforts by companies, such as Google, libraries and publishers are not uniformly attempting to digitize all print materials and the “initial targets are around 12%–15% of the estimated 65M titles in print.”3 Hughes’ research shows that the emphasis of digitization programs in libraries focuses on popular items instead of research material, and the material located in archival collections is essentially ignored. In addition, legal constraints such as copyright and licensing also affect what can and cannot be digitized. Ultimately, what this means is that libraries will continue to purchase print, therefore adding material to their already overcrowded bookshelves. This is contradictory to the belief of patrons, university administrators, and local government officials that all books, articles, and knowledge in general are available or will soon be available on the internet. Adding to this stacks space crisis is the continual decrease in the use of print material and the increase in demand by library patrons to have the library utilize its space for reasons other than storing low-use print items. Although the needs for the use of the library space varies depending on the nature and purpose of the library itself (i.e., academic, public, and school), there are a number of general space trends seen in all libraries. In particular, librarians are experiencing an increasing demand to house technology labs, multimedia rooms, group and individual study rooms, cafés, and learning commons. Library patrons are not the only people requesting libraries to reorganize their space. University administrators are beginning to reclaim space within the library for administrative offices, student services, research initiatives, or other purposes not related to library functions.This is creating additional space constraints within traditional brick-and-mortar libraries. Despite the fact that space is at a premium, there continues to be reluctance among the governing bodies of libraries and their parent institutions to alleviate the bookstacks crisis by funding construction of new buildings or additions to existing library buildings. The reason for this reluctance is twofold. Most libraries, particularly in highly populated areas, are land locked with no space to grow or build. The second reason is cost. If there is room to build in highly populated areas, the cost for constructing a new building or extending the library building is often too high to justify. As a result, many libraries, particularly academic libraries, are turning to off-site storage facilities as a solution to alleviate the issues of overcrowded stacks and demand for more study space.
A major reason libraries are considering off-site storage facilities is that the construction costs are significantly lower than building in the campus proper, if such coveted space can be identified. Even in their own spaces, many libraries are making the tradeoff between existing bookstacks and the creation of new, spectacular interactive spaces. Murray-Rust (2011) found that “the cost per volume for construction is $3.75 for a high-density facility versus $13.39 for a standard on campus library construction.” Off-site storage not only addresses the shortage of building space in populous areas in cities or on campuses but it also provides a viable alternative to the high cost of building a traditional library.4 CHEMS Consulting echoed the cost savings of shelving material in high-density storage facilities versus traditional library stacks. In a study conducted at the University of Melbourne, the firm determined that “the cost of retaining a low-use item in the main library at the University of Melbourne was 4 times greater than relegation to storage.”5 But the cost savings for building an off-site storage facility versus a traditional library is not the only advantage: the cost of storing an item in an off-site storage facility is also cheaper when compared with traditional library stacks. According to Courant and Nielson, the cost of storing a book each year on a traditional library shelf costs $4.26 but this annual cost decreases to $0.86 to house the same item in a high-density off-site storage facility.6 One can see that the advantages of off-site storage facilities and how they can substantially reduce long-term costs. There are, however, disadvantages to sending items to an off-site storage facility. One of the primary concerns is reduced access to already low-use items. It is likely that limiting immediate access to these items and the ability to discover them through browsing will reduce their usage even further. However, a number of studies have indicated that the use of material being housed in off-site storage facilities has been steadily increasing and it is believed that these usages will continually increase.7
ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT The foundation of this monograph will rest on five distinct sections: consideration of and planning for a remote storage facility; building and specifications of remote storage facilities; preparing for operations by defining workflow, staffing, policies, and processes; transferring collections with a breakdown of regular operations and collection management; and lastly, sustain operations and preparing for future operations and growth.
The first section will provide background and focus on identifying the need for an off-site remote storage building, planning, and approval. Chapter 1 will begin by briefly discussing the history of library storage facilities and then turning its attention to the types of library storage facilities found across the United States today. It will highlight the institutional, shared, and regional repositories, what they are, the differences between them and their advantages and disadvantages when choosing which type to build. Chapter 2 will provide guidance for scoping the project and moving through the approval and planning processes. The second section will focus on the steps and planning once the decision has been made to build a storage facility. Chapter 3 will look at project delivery systems, phases of a construction project and members of the project team so that the library will understand how construction projects are managed and flow. This chapter will consider key issues when writing the request for proposal and what to look for and what to ask during the interviews when hiring an architect to design the building and construction company that will actually build the facility. Chapter 4 will examine some starting points to consider when constructing a new storage facility or repurposing a building to store material and will highlight best practices of building a storage facility. It will consider topics such as new construction versus repurposing another building, humidity control and temperature requirements, fire suppression and the importance of understanding fire codes and how they impact the physical layout of the building, along with security, safety, and morale issues of having a handful of employees working at a remote site away from the main library building. A significant portion of this chapter will examine the options of shelving units that can be utilized in the facility. Specifically it will emphasize robotic, mobile, and standalone shelving systems and how their layout, height, depth, and weight when filled with material impact the physical building. The third section of this manuscript will address preparing for operating a remote storage facility. Chapter 5 will examine the technology, both hardware and software, needed to operate storage facilities along with the workflow and staffing models needed to operate the day-to-day processes of the facility. It will also discuss the archival software products available to these facilities and highlight the advantages and disadvantages of using the library’s current catalog or a “homegrown” software system versus a stand-alone archival software product used in the market today. This chapter will also highlight the traditional hardware needed to run archival software products. It will stress the importance of addressing questions about the need to union
catalog and direct/or indirect interlibrary loan, both of which will directly affect access to the users. Chapter 6 will move beyond the technology needs of the facility and will focus on the workflow and the knowledge base needs of the individuals working in the facility. This chapter will promote the importance of teamwork, individual ingenuity, and the need for flexibility and a “can do attitude.” Unlike traditional libraries rarely a storage facility manager will have the luxury of assigning one employee to only work on one task. For example, a person who processes material in the storage facility will also be assigned to shelve the books and help out with interlibrary loan. This type of cross-functional work environment will impact the facility’s staffing model and the very nature of employee that will be needed when hiring for any position within this facility.This chapter will also highlight critical workflow and processing needs that will be significantly different than what traditional libraries currently use. Chapter 6 will build on the previous 2 chapters as staffing is dependent on the systems and the defined workflow. It examines the staffing needs related to operating a remote storage facility, from job analysis, identification of necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities and defining position descriptions to effectively hiring, training, and managing staff. Chapter 7 will investigate the policies and establishment of the attendant processes needed for effectively operating a remote storage facility. Chapter 8 will also focus on collection management of libraries who are sending items to storage facilities. It will specifically look at best practices on how libraries are choosing material or should be choosing items to send to storage facilities. This chapter will discuss the merit of sending print and nonprint material, the integrity of the material and its condition. The chapter will end by reviewing best practices when making collection management decision. The fourth section of this book will focus on the materials going to an off-site storage facility and will be made up of two chapters, which will examine the core operations of remote storage facilities. Chapter 8 will focus on transferring and moving items from libraries to storage facilities and will consider the best practices for moving these items. Issues, such as boxing items, insuring, and transporting item, may seem simple but far too often they are overlooked and are often considered after a disaster happens. The chapter will also discuss the intense work load added to subject selectors, technical services, preservation, and shelving units as they struggle to prepare materials for storage. The chapter will then turn its attention to human factors of material relocation. Specifically, far too often emotions get in the way and librarians, along with patrons they serve, struggle to let
low-use items be relocated in off-site storage facilities. Their fear often comes from the lack of immediate access to the material once it arrives at the off-site facility. This fear often leads to a “slowing down” of the material selection process. This chapter will highlight best practices using the service leadership model to aid these librarians and patrons through this emotionally heightened times. Chapter 9 will address the transfer of materials on the receiving side, focusing on the remote storage facility, and examining specialized processes and systems. The transfer of collections can be complex and problematic as it is often where two distinct organizations intersect and their disparate policies and processes may not precisely correspond, requiring more oversight and reconciliation.The ongoing transaction and transfer of materials between two, or more, organizations also necessitates clear and constant communication. The final section addresses how to sustain the remote storage facility and position for the future.The Chapter 10 of this section will focus on sustainability and safety in storage facilities.This section will not only focus on the humidity and temperature requirements of storage facilities but also the archival trays, tray and shelving labels, markers, and barcodes all of which affect the longevity and integrity of the material. Chapter 11 looks at access. While the assumption with storage facilities is that access to materials is not its primary mission, there may need to be clear policies and processes around lending materials or providing access to them through document delivery. With collaborative agreements, this is critical as there may be multiple stakeholders from a variety of organizations making demands. Chapter 12 provides guidance about reporting and assessment of operations; with the potential for so many collaborating organizations, being able to collect data about operations and effectiveness and report back to various stakeholders is to be expected. Chapter 12 will also provide some guidance on planning for the future, how to position the remote storage facility to meet future demands or directions. Through the book, there will be case studies, as seen in Chapter 13, and vignettes that will provide a real-world perspective on various aspects, situations, or roles addressed in the text. One that will look at the joint collaboration between the University of Texas—Austin and Texas A&M University shared storage facility in Austin Texas and the issues that arose around that facility. It will highlight workflow processes to help libraries see what was done and what they could do to avoid some of the pitfalls that arose. A second case study will look at the second joint storage facility that the University of Texas—Austin and Texas A&M University–College Station
built in Bryan, Texas. After identifying the problems that arose with the Austin facility, the second case study shows how the shared storage facility in Bryan was built to address those original issues. These case studies will help the reader identify and understand possible issues that might arise when operating a shared storage facility. In addition to cases, each chapter will also include a Tool Kit with checklists, sample policy statements and administrative documents, and workflows and procedures among other helpful addenda. This study will conclude with discussion of questions to ask and issues to think about in moving forward.
REFERENCES 1.Wood PA, Walther JH. The future of academic libraries: changing formats and changing delivery. The Bottom Line 2000;13(4):173–82. 2.Heath FM. The University of Texas: looking forward: research libraries in the 21st century. Journal of Library Administration 2009;49(3):311–24. 3.Hughes B. Why digitization increases the value of print collections. 2007. Paper presented at the CAVAL Seminar Wagging the long tail: managing print collections in a digital age, held on 3 May 2007, viewed 12/15/2015 http://www.caval.edu.au/assets/files/ Research_and_Advocacy/Wagging_the_Long_Tail/Hughes.pdf. 4.Murray-Rust C. High density storage for libraries. 2011. Available at: www.orbiscascade. org/index/rlsc-library-storage. 5.Fielden J, Harris C, Hayes H, Schofield A. Optimising storage and access in UK research libraries: a study for the CURL and the British library. New Review of Academic Librarianship 2005;11(2):97–152. 6.Courant PN, Nielsen M. “On the cost of keeping a book.” The idea of order: transforming research collections for 21st century scholarship. 2010. p. 81–105. 7.Reilly Jr, Bernard F. Developing print repositories: models for shared preservation and access. Managing economic challenges. Council on Library and Information Resources; 2003. 1755 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20036. Payne L. Library storage facilities and the future of print collections in North America. Dublin, OH: OCLC Programs and Research; 2007. Seaman S. Collaborative collection management in a high-density storage facility. College and Research Libraries 2005;66(1):20–7.
This page intentionally left blank
Consideration and Planning Libraries have long been referred to as storehouses of knowledge. It is expected that they will house the wealth of published information from academic treatises to government information to creative works and assure access to and preservation of all of it for the benefit of current and future generations. With the sweeping changes that have stricken higher education, research and information, there are no competing priorities, with impetus for libraries to focus on hosting research activities as opposed to just being a warehouse for the research products themselves. This movement for libraries to provide areas for collaboration and multimedia creation, information commons, and innovations such as 3-D printing and gaming has subsumed the spaces that once held carefully selected and managed collections. Still, holding to the long-held mission for preservation of and access to information, libraries have sought solutions to safeguard their collections. In many cases, they come together for that shared purpose to assure the continued access to this carefully collected knowledge—through the construction of storage facilities.
This page intentionally left blank
An Introduction to Storage Facilities: Types and Examples One of the most crucial issues that research libraries continue to face is related to the vast amount of printed volumes they purchase and the limited space that is available to house this material. Over time, shelves begin to fill and eventually there is no more room to house the mountain of books being purchased. Space for collections competes with study space and the footprint for library services. Historically, to alleviate this space crisis an academic library either constructs new additions to its existing building or if it is fortunate, it would be given permission to build a new departmental library located near the main library. Construction of departmental libraries allowed the main library to transfer subject collections from the main library to the departmental libraries creating must needed space. It was this additional construction that allowed libraries to circumvent transferring print collections to storage facilities, whether on-site or remote, for many years. Throughout the 1920s library collections continued to grow at an alarming rate but luckily construction of new buildings or additions was able to keep up with the demand for new shelving space. However, ongoing construction of departmental libraries was not a viable option for most universities or colleges. University administrations and state legislatures began questioning the reasoning behind the need to continually build new library buildings to house print materials. Additionally, libraries faced budget constraints particularly during the 1930s and World War II and in conjunction with soaring building costs and increased congestion on academic campuses, building new libraries has become a less and less frequent occurance. Even during the largest building boom in library history (1967–74) book collections grew a little faster than the new space to hold them.1 Consequently, by the 1980s and 1990s, many academic institutions around the world began to consider the off-site storage facility as the most feasible solution to their space crisis.
1.1 TYPES OF STORAGE FACILITIES Today, there are two different types of library storage facilities that are built in the United States: each is grounded in either the Harvard model or the automated storage and retrieval system (ASRS) model. These two types of facilities may be either institutional and cooperative: 1. Institutional storage occurs when one library builds a storage unit, on or off an academic campus, to house its own material. 2. Cooperative (sometimes called shared) storage occurs when two or more libraries build a storage unit together to save money. However, there is no attempt by the two libraries to collaborate on what is placed in the storage unit, they just share the space. Within the cooperative model there are varying degrees of cooperation: collaborative, regional library center, and repository libraries: a. Collaborative storage occurs when two or more libraries (not necessarily from the same university) build a storage unit together and agree on collection management policies, such as format and duplicates, for the material they will be placing in storage. b. Regional library storage centers are storage units that have ongoing specialized collection development responsibility. c. Repository library storage units occur when a group of libraries come together to place items in a storage unit but they transfer the ownership of the item to the repository storage unit.2
1.1.1 Institutional Storage Facilities In 2007, of the 68 storage facilities in operation in the United States and Canada, 79% were classified as institutional. Libraries generally manage these storage facilities as another location or branch on their campus. Often the first items to grace the shelves of a storage unit are low-use monographs or print journal runs that are electronically available. One advantage to building this type of facility is that the individual library will have complete control of the building and its operations. The library has the comfort of knowing that once the item goes onto the shelves in the remote storage facility, it will remain there until the library wants the item to return to the main library. One disadvantage of building an institutional storage facility is that libraries sometimes do not consider what other storage facilities in the region may already be holding. As a result, multiple copies of the same book may be stored in multiple storage facilities without considering the need or
An Introduction to Storage Facilities: Types and Examples
cost to house all these duplicates. A second disadvantage to an institutional storage facility is related to indirect interlibrary loan. Generally, institutional storage facilities may not have direct interlibrary loan but rather will receive requests via email as a third party through their home library. This can slow down the interlibrary loan process and cause delay in getting the item to the patron.
1.1.2 Cooperative Shared Storage Facilities The remaining 21% of the 68 storage facilities operating in the United States and Canada in 2007 are classified as shared or cooperative storage facilities.3 Though multiple libraries may share storage, they often treat the facility like a secondary shelving space and do not work together to develop a single collection. The facility will end up housing duplicate copies of the same item.3 Although, shared facilities are initially more economical than individual institutional storage facilities, particularly for smaller institutions, they face many of the same issues that institutional facilities face with one very large exception; deselection or relocation of items back to the home library. This means a library could place an item into the storage facility and then remove it at any time, making it difficult for other storage participants to weed their own collection and rely on the copy placed into the storage facility. This was particularly relevant in storage facilities where participant libraries used the storage facilities as temporary shelving instead of long-term, low-use storage. 184.108.40.206 Collaborative Facility When libraries take an additional step closer to a collaborative model and agree on collection management policies for the material being placed into a storage facility, they are now establishing what is known as a collaborative facility. Not only do collaborative facilities establish policies on the services the storage unit will offer to participating libraries and users but they also create policies related to the following: •the scope of the subject materials that the facility will receive, •in what circumstances duplicate titles are accepted, •the condition of materials, •the format or medium of materials, and •circulation and access. One problem surrounding collaborative facilities is that most libraries who participate in these types of storage units do not transfer ownership of the material to the storage facility but prefer to retain ownership for themselves.The legacy idea that the size of a library’s collection is equated with the
Library Storage Facilities
“prestige” of the university, aka rankings, make contribute to this preference. As a result, shared ownership of the physical piece is often not considered and, despite duplication policies between the individual participating libraries, there remains the common practice of institutions contributing copies of titles already in the storage facility. Rarely will one institution weed material found in its open stacks because the same material is housed in the collaborative storage facility. Consequently, there is no reduction in duplication of lowuse items between the storage unit and participating libraries. To alleviate the duplication issue, retention agreements are needed to ensure that items deposited into the storage unit cannot be permanently removed from the facility. However, rarely are retention policies drafted because collaborators may struggle with trust and sharing control of their collection to other libraries. A prime example of a collaborative storage facility is the British Library Document Supply Center (BLDSC). It was a disposal destination and retention facility of last resort for libraries in the United Kingdom. According to O’Connor, Wells, and Collier, the BLDSC “has acted as the de facto collaborative national store, keeping at least one copy of items deemed worth of retention relegated from universities.”4 220.127.116.11 Regional Storage Facility If libraries take the next step beyond collection management and move to producing collaborative collection development policies, they are building a regional library storage center that will have an ongoing specialized collection development responsibility. Collaborative collection development is not a new phenomenon in the library world. Libraries of close proximity, for example, have come together to purchase electronic databases, print journal runs, and monographs, all in an attempt to save funds. When libraries build a regional storage facility, they parse out a part of their individual acquisition budgets toward building a specialized collaborative collection that would be housed in the shared facility. When this is done, libraries also create retention and purchasing agreements between the participating libraries so that each participating library knows who is responsible for purchasing what material. Retention and purchasing agreements help to alleviate the concern that on the side of each party should they decide to begin weeding their main library collection and rely solely on the regional storage facility’s copy. However, it must be stated that regardless of whether retention or purchasing agreements are in place, there is little if anything a library can do if it is told to cancel a subscription or if they can no longer support the operating cost of a storage facility because of a budget crisis. Imagine if
An Introduction to Storage Facilities: Types and Examples
the library was told to get rid of their entire print collection including the materials housed in the shared facility? 18.104.22.168 Repository Storage Facility The third type of shared storage building is the repository storage facility. Up to this point, all libraries that have come together to share a storage space, whether they are participating in a collaborative collection development agreement or not, but the libraries have all retained ownership of the items that they place into the storage facilities. However, when libraries transfer ownership to the storage facility, such as the Five Colleges, the model of the storage unit changes and a print repository library storage unit is born. According to Payne: Bound journals deposited in the Five College Library Depository by any of the four colleges (but not the state university) become the property of the consortium. Bound journal deposits are coordinated in order to store the most complete run and the best copy…Some shared facilities operate as “de facto” repositories; that is, they establish a no-duplication policy at the shared facility (which may or may not be enforced) but the individual libraries retain ownership of the stored volumes and guarantee to make them available to other members. Other members rely on the guarantee to de-accession from their own collections.5
One the other hand, the National Repository Library of Finland, which was established in 1989, is a resource shared by all Finnish libraries and according to its website says “that it is the most economic[al] way of storing library material.”6 This repository provides permanent book storage for all Finnish libraries where libraries transfer ownership of items stored in National Repository Library of Finland to the storage facility. It receives 2.48 to 4.35 linear miles of material from participating libraries each year. Similar national repositories have been operating in Norway, Estonia, and France; and one of their primary functions is to reduce cost for storing library material at a regional and national level.7 The Joint Library Facility (JLF) in Bryan, Texas, operates on this type of shared ownership agreement. Although ownership is not transferred to the storage library, items can be requested for use but cannot be removed permanently from the facility’s shelves. If a library wishes to deaccession the item and reclaim it from the storage facility and return it to its own shelves and holdings and the item in question is being shared, then the library is charged for the replacement cost of the piece. As a result, member libraries are assured that the items will not leave the facility and consequently they can share these items found on the storage facility shelves.
Library Storage Facilities
1.2 STORAGE FACILITIES IN PRACTICE To see how a true shared repository can aid its member libraries we look first to efforts outside the United States. The United Kingdom Research Reserve (UKRR) combines the central and distributed storage model. United Kingdom’s higher education institutions pay to become members of UKRR and operate on the “last three copies” principle. The British Library retains one copy of an item and at least two other academic libraries retain their copies of the same item.The other UKRR libraries may dispose of their copies. The pilot phase of the project had freed 11,000 meters of shelf space by August 2008. Phase 2 began in 2009 with a goal of freeing 100,000 meters by the end of 2014. The freed space was not found only in the libraries themselves. Some UKRR members who had been paying for commercial storage for some of the journal volumes were able to withdraw these volumes and, thus, free themselves of this cost.8 In Australia, the most coordinated efforts began in the province of Victoria. CAVAL, originally called the Co-operative Action by Victorian Academic Libraries but now expanded beyond Victoria and known only by the acronym, was established in 1978 to foster collaboration and cooperation between member libraries. In 1993 CAVAL received funding to construct the CAVAL Archival and Research Materials (CARM) Centre, which opened in 1996. From the beginning CARM allowed depositing libraries to maintain ownership of their materials, but member libraries were encouraged to cede ownership to the consortium and form the CARM Shared Collection. Member libraries could then discard their own copies of the materials in the Shared Collection. By 2013 almost 400,000 volumes belonged to the CARM Shared Collection, out of a facility that could hold one million volumes.When planning began in 2007 for an expansion, “CARM2,” member libraries wanted no provision for ceded ownership to a shared collection. All depositing libraries retained ownership of their materials in the second module.9 University libraries in Finland, as stated above, can rely on the National Repository Library to retain older printed materials, allowing individual libraries to concentrate their material expenditures on current publications and resources, particularly electronic access.10 The Universities of New Zealand, a consortium of the eight university libraries, contracted with a commercial provider to store one copy of low-use print serials for the country.When a library deposits materials into the storage facility, it notifies the other libraries, which may then discard their copies.11 In the United States, storage facilities were not a new idea. In 1892, Charles Francis Adams was credited with being the first person in the