The University of California Libraries: A Plan for Development (1977)
The University of California Libraries: A Plan for Development (1977)
The University of California Libraries: A Plan for Development (1977)
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
X. Housing 177<br />
For the purposes <strong>of</strong> the model and this plan, there<strong>for</strong>e, two<br />
regional compact shelving facilities are assumed, one in the North<br />
and one in the South.<br />
Staffing the Facilities. For each <strong>of</strong> the two facilities, a<br />
minimal staff will be necessary to service requests and carry on its<br />
activities. Based on the experience <strong>of</strong> other institutions and estimated<br />
workload, a staff <strong>of</strong> 13 is projected <strong>for</strong> each <strong>of</strong> the two facilities,<br />
as follows:<br />
1 Director<br />
4 FTE <strong>for</strong> maintenance <strong>of</strong> files and circulation activities<br />
(including service to on-site users)<br />
4 FTE <strong>for</strong> shipping and receiving<br />
4 FTE <strong>for</strong> stack maintenance, retrieval and replacement <strong>of</strong><br />
needed items.<br />
<strong>The</strong> cost <strong>of</strong> this staffing is estimated at approximately $194,000 per<br />
center per year. For the 6 years between the time the facilities are<br />
occupied and the year 1987/88, the cumulative staffing costs <strong>for</strong> the<br />
two facilities, in <strong>1977</strong> dollars, would be $2,328,000.<br />
Total Costs <strong>of</strong> the Facilities. <strong>The</strong> total costs <strong>of</strong> the proposed<br />
facilities, both on-campus and <strong>of</strong>f-campus can now be calculated, and<br />
are shown in Table 33. Some new construction on campuses will still<br />
be necessary <strong>for</strong> works that do not fall into the categories eligible<br />
<strong>for</strong> compact shelving, so the cost <strong>of</strong> this construction must be added<br />
in. <strong>The</strong> total costs <strong>for</strong> this alternative, as indicated, are then<br />
about $56,561,000 if the facilities are <strong>of</strong>f-campus, and about<br />
$59,165,000 if they are constructed on campus. <strong>The</strong> savings realized<br />
by this alternative as compared with the "base case" are $32,869,000<br />
or $30,265,000, depending on the location <strong>of</strong> the facilities.<br />
Elimination <strong>of</strong> Unnecessary Duplicates. If two regional facilities<br />
are assumed, an additional economy measure may also be considered.<br />
Because the materials to be shelved in the regional<br />
facilities will be little-used, there would be relatively little<br />
point in retaining more than one copy within the region. With the<br />
data collected by the research team, it is possible to estimate the