Ohlone College Council

Room 1216

43600 Mission Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94539


Minutes of College Council

April 2, 2004                                       UNADOPTED

Page 1 of 3 Pages                                   



MEMBERS PRESENT:   Martha Brown, Douglas Burns, Keith Clark, Clifton Der Bing, Linda Evers, Tom Holcomb, Dennis Keller, Patrick Lane, Elizabeth Silva, Connie Teshara, Doug Treadway, Debbie Tucker




1.                        Approval of Minutes


                        Moved/Tucker/Seconded/Passed to approve minutes from the

                        March 26, 2004, meeting.


2.   Fremont Campus Master Plan

Dr. Treadway stated that the Council will be asked to take action on the master plan for the Fremont Campus on April 16, 2004.  The overall approval of the Master Plan (Board action on April 28) would move the project forward to the point that an architect could start the plans by the end of the semester.   In view of the time schedule, members presented concerns that they and their peers have regarding the current plan.  Indiviudals’ concerns and comments included in sepearate document on the College Council’s web page, and will be addressedin the next President’s Forum.  It was suggested a weekly update of the planning and implementation process be included in the Monitor.  Avote by the Council will be taken at the April 16th meeting.


Patrick stated that his constituency indicated overwhelming approval of the current plan.  Concerns included custodial staffing for the new Student Support Services Building, providing solar energy alternative, cosmetics of the new building, and the possibility of adding the building on to the current building 6.


Douglas also indicated support.  He noted confusion about the gateway to Main Street, parking issues, and concerns about where people would end up.


Debbie was concerned about the lack of response she had received from her group.  She stated that it appeared that there was agreement with the plan, particularly moving the location of the new Student building.  There were also concerns about environmental issues, noise during construction, and choices for furnishing renovated or new areas.


Clifton remarked that many ASOC members were concerned about the eventual location of the cashier’s window.  Deanna reported that the current plan (at least temporarily) will be to move Accounting to Building 26.



Elizabeth expressed approval of the addition of Main Street, making the library more visible.  Dr. Treadway suggested that an area of the library be designed for continuous updates on the projects on campus.  Dennis added that a model had been displayed during the construction of the Smith Center.


Dennis also stated that the time line for the integration of the projects was of concern, especially because of displacement.  He expressed support for better lighting throughout, concern about student count during construction, and concern about money spent on the gateway.  Dr. Tradway indicated that a real gateway was not planned, but rather an illusion of a gateway opening onto Main Street.


Don Eichelberger addressed time lines and stated that the plan is to disrupt any given area only once.  Joanne noted that student count was not down during the site safety project.


Linda inquired as to the future of Hyman Hall.  Jim stated that planning is needed for future uses of this building.  He added that one consideration might be partnering with a 4-year college.


Tom stated appreciation for efforts to keep the deaf population informed.  His group likes the idea of clustering, but is concerned about accessibility for handicapped.  Also of concern is parking and preservation of the beauty of the campus.


Walt suggested that more information should be made available on LEEDS.  He also suggested the possibility of using Hyman Hall as a conference center.


Deanna addressed the issue of custodial funding.  Because of additional square footage and requirements of the State, she believes a scaled back building will provide a better chance for funding.  It was also noted that the parking lots are not part of the Bond projects.


Dr. Treadway suggested that development of the Mission Blvd. Front might subsidize parking construction.  Jim added that because of the location, this frontage should be considered really hot property.


Don noted that the construction of new buildings is easier and faster than renovating existing buildings.  He also discussed early morning and/or late night “noisy” construction, staging areas, and security staffing for risk areas.  He estimated that the actual construction of the new building will be 18 to 20 months.


Dr. Treadway mentioned the possibility of moving the baseball field sooner rather than later.  He stated that the expense of this move would not nearly compare with the cost of building a structure (such as parking).


All agreed that keeping the campus community informed on current work and plans is of the utmost importance.


·        Next meeting


Council vote on Master Plan – Fremont Campus

Joint Budget Task Force/College Council meeting

Compressed/Alternative schedule presentation and discussion