November 12, 2009
12 Noon, Room 1506
In attendance: See sign-in sheet
Meeting Minutes: From last meeting were distributed
Special Reports:
A. Green House Gas Inventory Report
Tiffany Batac of Parsons/Brinkerhoff gave a report on Chabot College’s
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, draft report, and an overview of how this
study will eventually be used to develop a Climate Action Plan. AB32-Global
Warming Solutions Act requires State public agencies to have a plan in place to
diminish “carbon footprint”. Benchmarks were indicated on a handout (see
distribution). Transportation issues (Vehicle Miles Traveled) are the largest form
of emissions that the campus is responsible for. The Greenhouse report is on the
Facilities website.
B. B100, Learning Resource Center, Feasibility Report
Mani Farhadi and Ernie Yamane of Steinberg Architects presented the feasibility
study on Bldg. 100 remodel. Three options were presented. These were a “No
Demo”, a “Minimal” remodel, and a “Moderate” remodel. The current construction
budget for the Bldg. 100 project is 3.1 million dollars. The Minimal remodel has a
construction cost estimate that is within the budget based on the evaluation of
Steinberg. Much discussion ensued from those involved in the Bldg. 100 project
on the need to find an extra 1.3 million construction dollars plus additional dollars
for soft costs to support the Moderate remodel plan. There was a request for
support from Bldg. 100 committee members present, and significant voiced
support from Facilities Committee members, towards a preference for the more
expensive, over- budget, Moderate Plan. Cindy Hicks pointed out that, long term,
the Moderate plan would also save in staffing costs, as there would be less staff
required to supervise in this plan due to the removal of more interior walls. In
Chabot College
Facilities and Sustainability Committee Minutes
Page 2
general, operational costs long term may be less with more money allocated to
construction up front. Dave Fouquet asked about whether seismic issues were a
problem. Doug Horner indicated that the threshold for a mandatory seismic
upgrade was not reached per the meeting between Steinberg and DSA.
C. Faculty Office Study Report
Phil Newsom of tBP Architects gave a report on the much anticipated office
utilization study. The report itself was distributed, and is available on the Facilities
Committee website. Much discussion ensued regarding our current office space
status and the “cap load” number given to us by the State. Newsom and Horner
both indicated that the variables of cap load were not a good driver for this
decision making in this discussion. Specifically, the state reported “cap load”
tracks all office space on a campus whereas this report was concerned only with
faculty office space. Newsom indicated that we have plenty of faculty offices on
campus with the opening of the IOB, assuming we do not heavily renovate 1100,
1500, and 2000. Any renovation of these spaces, that increases office size from
the existing 72 s.f. to the campus standard 100 s.f. will have an impact on the
number of offices available. All of these buildings are non-standard for office
space, except for B1100 which has larger offices, and renovation will result in a
reduction of spaces in these buildings. The level of renovation of any or all of
these buildings will ultimately dictate whether we have less than adequate space
or not. Horner pointed out that there are not enough dollars in these budgets in
total to do a full renovation, so the likelihood of renovating all spaces is not
currently possible, unless dollars are shifted to these budgets. Fouquet pointed
out that the upstairs offices in 2200 and the two offices in 3100 are also nonstandard and should be considered in this mix along with the others noted above.
The question was asked whether the move of administration from 200 to the IOB
would result in a loss of adequate space for faculty. The meeting was growing
long and further discussion was tabled. Horner asked for the committee to go
back and read the whole report, and it would be on agenda for next meeting for
more discussion.
Project Status Update
Tabled in the interest of time.
Rumor Control
It was affirmed by Horner that no decision had ever been made regarding the
status of Bldg. 200 (including full closure) even if administration moved out of this
building. The building could be re-purposed, renovated, used for swing space,
torn down or replaced. No decisions on this have been made at this point.
Administration has not indicated that they would be vacating 200 at this time.
Other Matters Initiated
Tabled in the interest of time.
Chabot College