Skip to the content of the web site.

Staff & Administration • Library Documents

Task Group on Library Collections Space

Final Report

June 11, 1992

Appendix B

Solutions Considered by the Task Group

3. High Density Cooperative StorageTORAGE

  1. Definition
    A library storage facility built, owned and managed cooperatively by two or more institutions, for the purpose of storing and providing access to low-use material. This proposal is in tune with government policy that stresses the need for interdependence in the provision of resources for the support of graduate studies and faculty research.

  2. Requirements
    A simple shell structure, built to HVAC standards and capable of being expanded on a regular basis. Location would be on low-cost land in proximity to the participating universities. There should be storage capacity for 800,000 to 2,000,000 volumes, staff work area, equipment area, sorting area, washrooms facilities, loading dock, and a small consultation area.

  3. Gain In Shelf Space
    Depending upon the number of participants, space for an additional 200,000 volumes per participant might be a reasonable expectation on opening day; ultimate capacity will depend upon further extensions to the original plant and the development of more efficient storage methods, but a goal of 500,000 volumes per participant is not unreasonable.

  4. Start-Up Financial Costs (Shared)
    $3-5 Million.

  5. Continuing Financial Costs (Shared)
    $300,000.

  6. Effects On Staff Morale
    Positive; tidy solution to space problem and development of cooperative solutions to questions of collection rationalization.

  7. Effects On the Accessibility Of the Collection
    Less immediate access to low-use material, but 24-48 hour turnaround possible. Easier and better organized access to medium and high-use material. In the long run, users will have access to a much wider range of material, particularly if participant libraries agree to pool collection resources and treat the storage collection as a common good.

  8. Potential Resistance
    User resistance to concept of remote storage for large quantities of material being removed systematically from the collection, but this could be counteracted by the provision of consultation space on site, the provision of access to an even wider range of resources, and the assurance that the last copy in the system will be retained.

  9. Long-Term vs Short-Term Solution
    Definitely long-term.

Two documents bearing on inter-university cooperation follow. Document A is a statement of Guidelines for Library Cooperation, as approved by the Council of Ontario Universities in 1983. Document B is a draft statement on cooperative storage, prepared by David Emery, Associate Librarian, Collections. It reviews the history of initiatives in this direction and discusses some of the features of a cooperative arrangement among the three local universities.

Two_documents

Document A

Guidelines for Library Cooperation

  1. That each university library be essentially self-sufficient in the provision of library services for undergraduate use;
  2. That the university libraries be effectively interdependent in the provision of service for research and graduate use;
  3. That the libraries continue their efforts to cooperate on practical projects of demonstrated utility and initiate new projects as needs and opportunities arise;
  4. That the libraries work towards a computerized network which permits shared and distributed access for the exchange of bibliographic data and location information;
  5. That the libraries maintain a watching brief on technological experimentation and development at the National Library and elsewhere for possible application in Ontario;
  6. That the libraries be encouraged to develop both individual and collective strategies that would facilitate the coordination of research resources in the light of developments arising from the changing environment of the universities.
Two_documents

Document B

Cooperative Storage

Organizational and Administrative Considerations

The North-American Context

The chronology of cooperative library storage in North America dates back to 1942, with the establishment of the New England Deposit Library. This was followed by the opening of the Hampshire Inter-Library Center and the Midwest Interlibrary Center, now known as the Center for Research Libraries, in 1951, and the Medical Library Center, New York City, in 1961. By 1972, 26% of active library consortia were operating or planning a central resource or storage centre.

One of the areas of activity defined for the Center for Research Libraries provides a definitive statement of the role of a cooperative storage facility: The deposit into a common pool of the infrequently used library materials held by participating institutions in order to reduce their local space needs, and also to make more readily available when needed more complete collections than any one of the participating libraries itself could reasonably maintain for its own exclusive use."

Studies of the operation and effectiveness of these existing facilities have concluded that:

  1. Distance is a handicap to successful cooperative schemes, and it is easier for libraries not too far removed from each other to work together.
  2. A problem noted was the lack of funds to employ someone to organize the storage collection. As a result, materials were merely stored, with resulting retrieval difficulties.
  3. Experience has shown the importance of passing ownership of the materials to the storage centre. Attempts to construct a union catalogue and to avoid or reduce duplication have failed when each member library retains ownership of its materials, chooses its own arrangement, and keeps its own records.

Rationale for Cooperative Storage in Ontario

In 1968, a joint meeting of the Council of Ontario Universities (COU) and the Committee on University Affairs (CUA) established guidelines for an Ontario library system. Included in the description of this system was the following proposition:

That each university be prepared to commit itself to participate in an Ontario Universities' library system, the principal features of which would provide for the various libraries to be essentially self-sufficient in the provision of service for undergraduate use, and to be effectively interdependent in the provision of service for research and graduate use.

This statement was re-confirmed by COU in 1983 and expanded to include the following:

That the libraries be encouraged to develop both individual and collective strategies that would facilitate the coordination of research resources in the light of developments arising from the changing environments of the universities.

In 1971, the Board for Library Coordination was created to recommend policies and budgets to COU. The 1973 report from the Board to COU on the establishment of a cooperative library system for Ontario Universities included a section on depository libraries, and it was proposed that long-range planning studies be initiated.

Proposal for Cooperative Storage

In 1983, the report of the Special Committee on the feasibility of an Ontario Universities' Record Centre to COU included also a feasibility assessment of a shared library storage facility and concluded that only marginal savings might accrue, but it was also stated that over the next 10 to 15 years, it could well transpire that the beliefs now expressed by several librarians" that the purchase/rental of a warehouse located on inexpensive land just off Hwy. 401 would be the least costly and most effective solution for libraries in south-central Ontario" may be validated."

In the event that it was confirmed that there were potential significant savings from such a centre, the committee recommended that a shared library facility on a relatively small scale be developed as a pilot project, the following benefits being envisaged:

  1. It would identify more precisely the planning, coordinating and logistical activities required for a larger shared facility.
  2. It would provide data and experience to confirm or modify the formulas developed in the preliminary feasibility assessment.
  3. It would encourage the design of collection management strategies that reflect the inter-dependence of library collections to support programs and research at the graduate level and beyond.
  4. In 1989, Robert Lee prepared a draft proposal for a Cooperative Storage Centre for the Ontario University Libraries laying out the rationale for establishing it. The following specifications are largely derived from that document.

Program for the Construction and Operation of a Cooperative Library Storage Facility by Guelph, Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier Universities

Financial Considerations

  1. It is envisaged that a one-time grant will be made by the provincial government to cover the cost of land, structure, shelving, and equipment. Costs of ongoing operations will be divided equally between member institutions.
  2. The cost of the facility must be demonstrably less than that of constructing conventional library space on-campus.

Physical Plant

  1. The storage centre should be on low-cost land in a central location off Hwy. 401, and in proximity to one of the Ontario Universities.
  2. It should have a capacity of 2,000,000 volumes, with room for expansion, e.g. a simple shell structure capable of being expanded on a modular basis.
  3. The most efficient way to shelve collections of this type is to use the concept of warehouse storage and to install manually-assisted compact shelving.

Collections

  1. The collection will contain single last copies of titles held in the participating libraries. In some categories, e.g. regional history and literature, a second-non-circulating copy might be retained.
  2. Bibliographic access and circulation control will be provided through an online catalogue and circulation system.
  3. Collections should be shelved by size and by accession number within each size sequence.
  4. Material in good condition that is not retained for storage or redirected to another library will be sent to the Canadian Book Exchange Centre (CBEC), given to other organizations, e.g. the Overseas Book Centre, or recycled.
  5. Holdings will be reported to the National Union Catalogue.

Services

  1. The storage centre will be a closed-access facility. FAX transmission will be provided and used for urgent requests, unless hard copy is specifically requested.
  2. Limited consultation space will be provided for users who need to consult material on site.
  3. Easy access to the Centre's holdings should be provided at each participating site through an online catalogue. Ideally the Centre should have its own online catalogue.
  4. Operation and staffing will give high priority to an efficient communication system with the member libraries so that materials required on interlibrary loan are quickly and easily available to participating libraries.
  5. Non-member libraries may borrow materials through established interlibrary loan channels. Existing agreements with respect to charge-back of interlending costs will apply.
  6. Individual libraries will be responsible for the transportation of material and personnel to and from the facility. Linkage to the IUTS network will occur at existing nodes.

Participation

  1. Membership in the consortium will be limited initially to the Universities of Guelph, Waterloo, and Wilfrid Laurier.
  2. At the discretion of the Board, membership may be extended to other institutions.
  3. All members will indicate their agreement in writing to abide by the terms and conditions of membership established by the Board.

Management and Staffing

  1. The management structure of the facility will consist of a Director and a Board of Management.
  2. Responsibility for the day-to-day operations of the Centre would be assigned to the Director, who will oversee the management of budgets, expenditures, staffing, facilities, collections and services, subject to the approval and authorization of the Board.
  3. The Board of Management will consist of the Chief Librarian of each of the member libraries. It will meet as required, but not less than annually, to receive reports from the Director on operational and financial matters, to approve budgets and to plan future initiatives.
  4. Ownership of the materials will be transferred from the contributors to the Centre, and the Board will establish policies regarding retention, storage, dispersal, or disposal.
  5. Staff will perform the following functions:
    • receive, process and shelve material
    • maintain an online catalogue and circulation system
    • fill interlibrary-loan requests
    • answer questions from participating libraries and casual users
    • keep the collection and facilities in good repair (dusting, rearranging, inventory)
    • prepare management reports for member institutions
    • weed the collection
  6. On-site staff will receive, process, and shelve materials and fill interlibrary-loan requests. Should a large backlog of incoming material accumulate, member libraries will provide staff on a short-term, ad-hoc basis to eliminate it.

David Emery
Associate Librarian, Collections

WWW version: June 5, 1995

Secretary to the University Librarian
Last Updated: May 26, 2005