More than one million people visit Olin Library every year, according to the Cornell University Library website And judging by how hard it’s been to find a seat these days, that’s not hard to believe. There’s a good chance you’re reading this editorial right now in one of the newly-upholstered chairs of Olin Café.

But is your safety at risk?

This past year, Olin Library revealed plans for a massive renovation, involving a total overhaul and rebuilding of floors three through seven. The motives for the project are diverse; they range from concerns about outdated infrastructure to problems maintaining a constant temperature.

But it is also clear that safety issues have become increasingly pressing.

The Cornell Chronicle quotes Carl A. Kroch Librarian Anne Kenney as saying, “[Olin] lacks basic life safety systems. It has no sprinklers. It has no smoke detectors. There is an outdated fire-detection system in the building. The University has had difficulty getting a second insurance carrier because of the potential for the loss of life and property.”

A library that hosts one million visitors per year has no sprinkler system? A library that fills to the brim with students each and every day had difficulty securing insurance coverage due to the potential for loss of life?

It seems that we should be asking ourselves an important question: Why, given the apparently extreme nature of these safety concerns, was this project not initiated years ago?

The aforementioned Chronicle article pays tribute to Kenney’s inspirational leadership and big thinking. But it is alarming that our University needed the arrival of this bold book reader to get the ball rolling.

The Olin Library Renovation website explains that “the Olin Renovation Planning Committee let out a sigh of relief” when Cornell’s Capital Funding approved the renovations.

“A sigh of relief?”

Why was the renovation committee forced to make pleas for capital funding in the first place? Olin Library is at the center of Arts and Sciences at Cornell. So much of the University’s material and human capital are contained within the walls of the building. Why weren’t these grave safety concerns addressed long ago with direct funding from the administration?

Members of the Cornell faculty have pointed out that closing floors three to seven will have a profound impact on the way social science research is conducted at this University. The intellectual experience of students too will be affected if they lose the ability to browse library resources over a period that could span a few years.

Yes, we need this renovation now. But could we have avoided such an extreme disruption with a little more foresight?

In this competitive educational marketplace, Cornell will need to work increasingly hard to attract bright, new students. But taking care of the most basic safety needs of existing students cannot be ignored. Especially when their lives are literally at stake.