OHLONE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
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
OPEN MEETING:
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