THE STATE
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234 |
TO: |
The Honorable the Members of the Board of Regents |
FROM: |
Carole Huxley |
COMMITTEE: |
Cultural Education |
TITLE OF
ITEM: |
Collections Stewardship |
DATE OF
SUBMISSION: |
November 21, 2003 |
PROPOSED
HANDLING: |
Discussion |
RATIONALE FOR
ITEM: |
Need for collection space and environmental controls |
STRATEGIC
GOAL: |
Goals 4 and 5 |
AUTHORIZATION(S): |
SUMMARY:
The extensive and valuable collections of the State Archives, Library and Museum are at risk in their current storage environment. In addition, these collections, as well as the active records that the Archives manages for all State agencies, have outstripped the available storage space. Off-site storage has provided a partial short-term solution to the latter problem, but is inadequate for long-term projected needs.
At your December meeting, the Committee will review the current status of collections stewardship, the expert panel’s initial recommendations for moving forward, and the steps that staff expect to complete before coming back to you with a set of options to address the situation in May.
Attached to this memorandum is the preliminary report of the panel and a background piece that provides detailed information about the collections and their use.
Attachments
NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT
OFFICE OF CULTURAL
EDUCATION
COLLECTION STEWARDSHIP AND
FACILITY PLANNING
BLUE RIBBON PANEL
REPORT
On September 24, 2003, the
Office of Cultural Education (OCE) invited a distinguished panel of experts to
advise us on our collection stewardship needs and facility plans. They
were:
·
John Egan, Panel Chair, President of the Renaissance
Corporation, former
CEO of Albany International Airport, and Commissioner of OGS from 1980 to 1989.
Mr. Egan was instrumental in the construction of the Empire State Plaza
including the Cultural Education Center (CEC).
·
Brenda Banks, Assistant State Archivist,
Georgia Department of Archives and History. Ms. Banks led the development and
construction of the Georgia Department of Archives and History’s new archival
facility opened in June 2003.
·
Meredith Butler, Director of Libraries, SUNY
Albany. Under Ms. Butler’s leadership, the University at Albany built a new
library.
·
Vince Wilcox, former Director of the
Smithsonian Museum Support Center (MSC).
Mr. Wilcox was involved in the design, development and construction of
the MSC, which houses museum collections and archival and library
materials.
The charge to the Panel was
to:
1.
Review staff’s assessment of
OCE’s facility needs, especially as they relate to collection
stewardship.
2.
Provide advice regarding the
development and implementation of a facility plan that will meet those
needs.
I. Findings
Based on materials sent to the
panelists and tours of three of OCE’s major facilities, the Panel members
reached the following conclusions:
1.
OCE staff has done an
extraordinary job of collection stewardship. Vince Wilcox noted: “The staff are
a highly specialized and valuable resource that must be cultivated…. Without
them, the collections are just a bunch of things.”
2.
OCE staff has accurately
assessed the current facilities’ inadequacy to meet the needs of many of the
collections both, now and in the future.* The Panel took particular note of the:
(1) New York State Records Center, (the storage facility for inactive paper and
electronic records for State agencies); (2) the Museum Storage Facility in
Rotterdam, NY; and (3) the Cultural Education Center (CEC).
·
State Records
Center: The lack of storage space in the State
Records Center has reached crisis proportions. The loss of staff that physically handle
records (from 9 people in early 1990’s to 3 in 2003) has compounded an already
dire situation. For the Archives to
continue to provide a cost-efficient and adequate records management service to
State agencies, additional space quickly must be found and staff levels
increased.
·
Museum Storage Facility at
Rotterdam: This large, non-insulated warehouse is
inadequate for collection storage.
Problems include a
leaky roof, sub-standard environmental controls, and insufficient numbers of
staff to manage the collections. Many objects (e.g. furniture, mixed
media) stored in the Rotterdam facility because of insufficient CEC space are
especially at risk of damage and deterioration because of the lack of
environmental controls.
·
Cultural Education Center
(CEC): It is clear that the Education
Department and OCE staff have made impressive – and, many times, successful --
efforts to ensure that collections are properly stored in the CEC. However, it is equally clear that
this 27 year-old building has become increasingly inadequate in terms of
providing collection space that will meet professional museum, archival and
library standards. In addition, the
CEC
is used in a multifunctional way and several of those functions are not
compatible with proper collections storage.
During the Panel discussion,
John Egan noted that the CEC needed major “re-engineering,” while Brenda Banks
spoke of the facility as being “functionally obsolete.” In a follow-up letter to Carole Huxley,
Vince Wilcox notes: “not only do you not have sufficient space to carry out your
functions, but the space you do have is inadequate to the tasks.”
II.
Recommendations
Based on it
findings, the Panel recommended the following:
1.
Facility
planning must grow out of program plans.
OCE should undertake a functional analysis of its needs and a reappraisal
of its programmatic and collection management decisions. Questions to be answered
include:
Ø
What
areas of our programs and collections overlap, in what areas are we (or should
we be) reliant on each other, and in what areas do we have very disparate needs
and requirements?
Ø
To
what extent, and in what ways, do the three institutions currently work
together? Are there other ways that
would be mutually beneficial?
Ø
How
does that impact facility needs?
Ø
What part does physical location
play in supporting the missions of the institutions? For example, to what extent does it
matter if the collection facilities are a number of miles away from the public
spaces? What would be the staffing
and cost implications of such a separation?
·
Who are our users? What do they want from our
services, programs, and collections?
·
What are the basic programmatic
decisions that affect how the institutions fulfill their respective
missions? Do these decisions need
to be reappraised, and if so, how?
How does this programmatic reappraisal affect facility planning? For example, do current advancements in
technology change the way OCE should manage, preserve, and provide access to,
its collections?
2.
It
is important to think creatively, both in terms of communicating with
decision-makers, and in developing viable capital funding strategies. Panelists advised us
to:
·
Articulate
a bold vision. Simply identifying
the problems and trying to tell people what they are is not
sufficient.
·
Do
a better job of “telling our story.”
Decision-makers and other stakeholders need to fully
understand:
Ø
The value and importance of the
collections.
Ø
The importance of the staff that
are involved in the management, preservation, research use of, and access to the
collections.
Ø
The fragility of some of the
collections, and the risks we are taking if we do not make changes in their
storage conditions.
Ø
Why they should care about the
preservation of our collections.
·
Explore various options for
obtaining funds.
3.
OCE cannot do
all of the planning itself. OCE
should undertake a "formal programming" of operations, under the direction of an
architect who specializes in such studies. This is a functional analysis of the
various components of our operations ("what we do") in conjunction with the
specific facility requirements needed to support them (e.g., accessibility,
security, environmental controls, spatial relationships among functions), which
could be used both to determine the utility of our current facility (for some if
not all current functions) and (if warranted) to design a new one. In turn, this
could provide realistic data for estimates of funding needs.
III. Proposed Next
Steps
Based on the Panel
recommendations, OCE management proposes the following steps over the coming
year:
1.
By
February 2004, update the OCE strategic plan and undertake a functional analysis
of programs and reappraisal of strategic decisions within OCE, particularly as
those factors pertain to facility needs.
Ensure that all facility planning aligns with the strategic and
operational plans of the three institutions as well as with the OCE Strategic
Plan.
2.
By
March 2004, develop and implement a plan that addresses our immediate needs,
including the:
·
Completion of the
11th floor renovation (Fall 2004).
·
Acquisition of temporary
additional storage for the State Records Center, if a cost-benefit analysis
shows this to be advisable.
·
Renovation of the Research
Library space in the CEC.
·
Improvement in the environmental
controls in the collection storage area on the third floor of the
CEC.
·
Filling of important staff
positions.
3.
By
March 2004, follow up with the Panelists regarding their own experiences. Specific questions
include:
·
How did they work with their
respective governments, to reach their goals?
·
What were the funding strategies
they used to support their construction plans?
·
How did the construction of
their new facilities help support their missions?
·
How did they
staff such a move? If mostly by
staff, how did this impact their other duties?
·
How
did their construction/move affect public access?
·
Did
they have to close facilities to the public? If so, what was the public
reaction?
·
What
part of their project was the most successful, least successful, and
why?
·
What
would they have done differently?
4.
By
May 2004, present viable funding options to the Board of Regents and the
Commissioner of Education.
5.
Hire
a facilities planner/architect to conduct a feasibility study, develop a
schematic design, and provide rough cost estimates. Study is to be completed by November
2004.
6.
By
November 2004, with the assistance of a consultant, develop and implement a
“marketing” plan that gets our message across to both decision-makers and
users.
APPENDIX
NEW YORK
STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
OFFICE
OF CULTURAL EDUCATION
COLLECTION
STEWARDSHIP
NEEDS
ASSESSMENT
I. Background
The New York State Education
Department’s Office of Cultural Education (OCE) operates three major cultural
institutions -- the New York State Museum, State Library, and State Archives.[1] Under the auspices of OCE, all three
institutions are dedicated to ensuring that valuable information, knowledge and
collections under their care, are preserved and made available, for current and
future generations.
Briefly:
New York State Research
Library: Founded in 1818, the Library provides
information services for the government and people of New York State through its
direct services and interlibrary loan program. In the Cultural Education Center, the
Library has a collection of over 20 million items, filling 96 linear miles of
shelving, and 18,000 cubic feet of manuscripts and other special
collections. Its particular
strengths are in law, medicine, social sciences, education, history, certain
pure sciences and technology, and New York State documents. The Library’s holdings include a
significant manuscript and rare book collection, as well as holdings in a wide
variety of formats, including paper, microform and electronic records. The Library answers over 123,000
information requests annually, and provides 500 databases for on-site research,
and access to thousands of online bibliographic and statistical
databases.
The Library also operates the
Talking
Book and Braille Library (TBBL), which provides reading
material (books in Braille and recorded media) to over 54,000 eligible
readers,[2]
who are visually impaired, physically disabled or learning
disabled.
New York State
Museum: The State Museum, with approximately
120,000 sq. ft. in exhibit gallery space, is the single largest tourist
attraction for the Capital Region, welcoming almost 1 million visitors
yearly. The Museum’s direct service
to the public include a permanent and temporary exhibit program, a full slate of
200 public programs a year, a variety of educational programs for school-aged
children, and direct access to collections for researchers and other interested
parties.
Since its establishment in 1843,
the State Museum collections and staff research provide the basis for its
services to the public. On behalf of the people of New York State, the Museum
cares for over 6 million specimens and artifacts. Museum
holdings include: natural history specimens in geology, paleontology, zoology,
and botany; historical, ethnographic, and archaeological artifacts incorporating
wood, textiles, leather, bone, metal, ceramics, glass, stone, and mixed media;
visual arts collections on canvas, paper, and film; and paper-based,
photographic, and electronic collections documentation.
New York State Archives: The “youngest” of the three
institutions, the State Archives was created by law in 1971, and began full
operation in 1978. The Archives
identifies, accessions, and preserves those records of New York State government
that have permanent value, in terms of history, government accountability and
research. The Archives houses paper, parchment, photographic and electronic
records, now totaling more than 75,000 cubic feet. Last year, its staff responded to more
than 60,000 research requests from government, business and the general
public. Holdings of the Archives
include records from all three branches of State Government and document
virtually every aspect and era of New York history.
The State Archives also operates
the New York State Records
Center, which
provides State government agencies with secure, cost-effective storage and
retrieval services for inactive paper and electronic
records.
II. Current Facilities
Below is a brief review of the
buildings currently utilized by OCE.
The Cultural Education Center
(CEC): The public service
and exhibit spaces, the administrative offices, and most of the collections of
the Museum, Archives, and Library are currently housed in the Cultural Education
Center (CEC), an 11-story building located in the Empire State Plaza, Albany,
New York. At approximately 1.5
million square feet, the CEC is the largest
single building owned and operated by New York State.
This facility, which was planned
during the 1960’s, and opened in 1976, has presented us with both opportunities
and problems during its 27-year history.
On the positive side, the CEC is located within the major governmental
hub in the State’s capital, which has made it relatively accessible to
residents, state government workers and officials, and – to a lesser extent –
tourists and other visitors. Its
use as: (1) a public space (with Museum exhibit galleries, Library and Archives
research rooms, and OCE meeting rooms and auditoriums for public lectures); (2)
a collection storage area for all three institutions; and (3) a Museum research
facility, has helped to link the research and collections of these institutions
with their public programming, educational, and information access
services. Finally, the CEC’s size
has made it possible for three major cultural institutions to be housed in the
same building, which has aided in encouraging inter-institutional
cooperation.
Unfortunately, the building has
not aged well, and the CEC’s disadvantages may now outweigh its advantages,
especially with regard to collection storage. The roof, which has already been
replaced once, and is being scheduled for a second replacement in the spring of
2004, has created major water leakage problems. In certain areas of the
building, the HVAC system is so sub-standard that valuable artifacts and
scientific specimens have already been damaged, and many other collections
continue to be at impending risk because of improper temperature and relative
humidity (RH) controls. Finally,
the physical plant does not lend itself to the expansion needed for collection
growth, because: (1) there is very little land for possible additions to the
building; and (2) load-bearing restrictions on the floors limit how collections
may be distributed throughout the facility.
Other OCE-operated
Facilities: In addition to the CEC, the OCE
institutions operate or oversee a number of other collection storage
facilities. These
include:
The State Records
Center: The State Records Center, operated by
the State Archives, and located three miles from the CEC, is a warehouse
facility with the capacity to store 227,000 cubic feet of inactive records for
State agencies.
Museum - Rotterdam
Storage Facility: This non-insulated, partially heated
warehouse, leased by the State Museum, and located 15 miles from Albany,
contains 100,000 sq. ft. of collection space.
Museum - Fish
Collection Facility:
The Museum also leases a storage facility to house its collections of fish and
other specimens preserved in alcohol and to provide associated lab space. These specimens were moved from the CEC
in order to meet building code regulations related to fire
hazards.
Archives - Leased
Space: Due to lack of adequate space in the
CEC, the Archives currently leases space from two commercial records storage
sites, in order to store its less-used archival records.
Library Storage - State
Education Department: The
Library stores lesser used materials on 5 floors of stack space in the State
Education Department Building.
III. Needs
Assessment
Over many years, OCE staff has
valiantly tried to solve the collection storage problems in the CEC and other
OCE-operated facilities. While
staff has been successful in some ways, the problems have become so severe in
the CEC, the State Records Center and the Rotterdam Storage Facility that these
spaces can no longer meet professional standards. The two most acute problems
have been that of poor environmental controls and lack of storage space for
collection growth.
1. Environmental
Controls:
Collection storage environments that meet professional standards are crucial for
ensuring the longevity of library, archival and museum collections. Specifically, any such collection
“should be protected from humidity extremes, high temperatures, high light
levels, harmful particulate contamination, and threats posed by the building
systems,”[3]
as well as water leak damage, and mold and pest infestations. While OCE staff experts have been able
to successfully address most of these threats, the HVAC problems in the CEC
cannot be resolved without massive and very expensive building renovations.
The Eleventh
Floor of the CEC: Since the CEC’s opening, the collections
and shared reference room of the State Archives and the Library’s Manuscripts
and Special Collections division were housed on the 11th floor. A 1994 external feasibility study
identified the inadequacies of this space for storing archival, manuscripts and
other special collections, especially with regard to HVAC system
problems.
Due to major fiscal constraints,
OCE was not able to begin actual renovation work on the 11th floor
until February 2001, with an allocation of $7.5 million, (the estimate from the
1994 feasibility study).[4] This project, (with an expected
completion date of Fall 2004) will provide temperature and RH levels that will
meet professional standards for these primarily paper-based collections. Unfortunately, the renovations have been
so long in coming, that the Archives and Library – which are temporarily located
on the 3rd floor during the 11th floor construction --
will be faced with space problems almost as soon as the project is completed.
(See below for further details.)
The Third
Floor of the CEC: The Museum’s collections, currently
housed on the third floor of the CEC, are at critical risk of damage because of
the HVAC problems. There are a
number of reasons for this:
1.
HVAC Control
Problems: The
facility’s HVAC control systems do not work in a way that provides proper
controls for particular areas in the building. There is no simple one-to-one
relationship between thermostats, existing partitioned storage spaces and HVAC
controls, especially in the Museum’s collection storage areas on the third
floor. In fact, attempting to stabilize the temperature and/or RH level in one
area often has led to fluctuations in other areas. In order to address this
problem a tremendous rerouting of ductwork, and patchwork on the external walls,
would have to take place.
2.
Spikes in Temperature/RH
Levels: For
reasons that the building engineers have not been able to understand or solve,
major fluctuations in temperature and RH levels occur with erratic – and
dangerous – frequency in the third floor collection areas.
3.
Temp/RH level requirements
differ depending on the type of collection: The wide variety of collections held by
the Museum (from biological specimens, to fossils, to fragile Native American
artifacts to fine furniture), require a number of distinct temperature and RH
combinations. Even should we be able to renovate the 3rd floor’s HVAC
system, it is exceedingly unlikely that we would be able to fine-tune the
temperature and RH levels to provide the optimum protection for each medium
represented in the collections.
In the late 1990’s, the Museum
explored the possibility of renovating the third floor and a portion of the
Basement. Even at that time, it was
estimated that a complete renovation of the 3rd floor that addressed
the environmental problems would cost $10-15 million.
State Records
Center: The areas
at the Records Center that house unstable media such as electronic tapes must be
retrofitted with updated environmental control and monitoring equipment.
Rotterdam
Storage Facility: The Museum’s
Rotterdam facility provides adequate shelter from the elements for a portion of
the Museum’s collection (e.g.
core rock samples, historical vehicles and architectural elements). However, due to lack of space in the
CEC, the Museum has also been forced to store other collections (e.g.
furniture, mixed media) in Rotterdam.
These collections are at risk because of lack of environmental controls.
2. Space for Collection
Growth: All three OCE institutions have
developed their own collections policies, including the criteria they use to
guide collection acquisitions. Based on these criteria, and past experience,
each institution has projected its collection growth needs. (It is worthwhile to
note, that previous projections made by the Museum, Archives and Library over
the past decades have proven to be quite accurate).
OCE’s10-
to 15-year collection growth projections indicate collection growth in each
institution will far out-strip the space available in the CEC and the Records
Center. While these predictions are
dire enough, further internal analysis indicates that, in fact, the situation is
even more serious.
State Records Center: The
State Records Center, located at the State Office Building Campus, is currently
at 104% capacity. Its space problem
has become so critical that staff has been forced to store 8,000 cubic feel of
records in aisles and office space.
Archives:
In 1991, Archives staff projected that the proposed renovation of the
11th floor would provide enough collection space until 2006. Unfortunately, that prediction is
becoming a reality. When the
collections are moved back to the 11th floor in 2004, staff expects a
two-year respite before the Archives runs out of space again. Should there be no alternative, the
Archives will be forced to lease additional off-site commercial storage space –
with environmental controls that are often questionable.
Museum: Collection growth projections for the
Museum are more complex because of the variety of collections in different
media. Once the Archives and
Library Manuscripts and Special Collections move back to the 11th
floor there will be some room for maneuverability. Even so, Museum curators
anticipate that collections storage areas on the 3rd floor will be
completely filled by 2006.
The
Museum has taken other factors into account in its collection growth
projections:
·
As
noted above, the Museum also has collections in two leased facilities (Rotterdam
Storage Facility and the Fish Collections Facility). Any facility plan will
probably include the relocation of these collections.
·
In
addition to the Museum collections already mentioned, it is very likely that the
Museum, in partnership with others[5],
will be establishing an Albany Archeological Center in the next few years, which
could be located either its own facility or as part of a larger Museum and/or
OCE facility (see Section
5).
Library: The Library is in a slightly better
situation, in that it anticipates managing within its allotted CEC space until
2007. In order to do so, however,
the collections of the Archives and Library Manuscripts and Special Collections
must return to the 11th floor on schedule, allowing the Library to
shift major collections from one area to another.
* See the appendix, “Collection Stewardship Needs Assessment” for additional details.
[1] In addition, OCE provides statewide leadership and support to libraries and library systems, local governments, historical societies and other records repositories, and public broadcasting stations. Annually, it administers a $100 million State library aid program, grants $13+ million to the public broadcasting stations in the State, and provides approximately $10 million in competitive records management grants to local governments.
[2] Includes approximately 39,000 at-home readers, and 15,000 students who receive materials through their schools.
[3] Lull, William, Conservation Environment Consultation Report and Renovation Program for the Archives and Library Manuscripts/Special Collections. Garrison/Lull, Inc. (1999).
[4] Final costs for the renovation may total more than $7.5 million, since this is the original 1994 cost estimate.
[5]The partners of the Museum are the University at Albany, the Albany Institute of History and Art, the Albany Visitors Center and the State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation.