BOARD FACILITIES & LAND USE
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Peralta Community College Di strict
APPROVED – APRIL 11, 2008
Meeting of the Board’s Facilities & Land Use Planning Committee
Meeting Date:
Time:
Location:
Friday, April 11, 2008
4:00 pm to 6:00 pm
District Administrative Center, Department of General Services
Physical Plant Conference Room
333 E. 8th Street
Oakland, CA 94606
Present:
 Nicky Gonzalez Yuen, Trustee (Chairperson)
 Dr. William Riley, Trustee
 Abel Guillen, Trustee
 John Banisadr, Purchasing Compliance Manager
 Dr. Sadiq B. Ikharo, Vice Chancellor of General Services
 Robert Adams, Merritt College President
 Gisele Gorgi, Merritt
 Hank Fabrian, Merritt
 Doug Williams, Blach Construction
 Abil Balaporia, Gerson & Overstreet Architects
 Debbie Budd, BCC










Jack Lin, Sustainability Consultant
Joseph Bielanski, Academic Senate President, BCC
Frank Chong, Laney College President
Shirley Coaston, Faculty Classified President
Rosemary Vazquez, Staff Service Specialist, DGS
Linda Berry, Merritt
Atheria Smith, SCALA
Karolyn van Putten, Merritt
Cy Gulassa, Trustee
Harry Overstreet, Gerson & Overstreet Architects
AGENDA ITEMS DISCUSSED
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA ITEMS
At the request of Trustee Yuen, agenda items were changed as follows:



Agenda items #1 (Approval of Minutes) was moved down to agenda #5.
Agenda #5 (New Merritt Science Bldg) was moved up to agenda item #2.
Agenda item #6 (Contract-based Strategies) was removed because General Counsel was
unable to make a presentation at this meeting, as planned.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
At the request of Trustee Yuen, approvals of March 07, 2008 meeting minutes were deferred to
the end of agenda items.
Board Facilities & Land Use Planning Committee Meeting
Minutes of 04/11/08 Meeting
Page 2 of 3
3. NEW MERRITT COLLEGE SCIENCE COMPLEX
As part of due diligence, Dr. Ikharo gave a presentation relating to the proposed new science
building at Merritt College. Topics included a brief history of this project (which began in 2002),
an overview of cost benefits, swing space issues, possible utilization of Building D and shared
governance status. Dr. Ikharo led a discussion relating to the pros and cons for the design and
construction of a new science building vs. renovation of existing “D” building and explained
capacity load ratios and productivity factors. Presentation was followed by a question and answer
session.
Dr. Adams spoke briefly relating to expansion of programs, the development of new and
alternative programs, outreach to bring more of the surrounding community to the campus and
the revenues they could generate. He also stated that meetings have been conducted with shared
governance with the majority of faculty and staff in favor of a new science complex as long as it
is a quality building. The Architect was available to answer questions and provide additional
clarification. Atheria Smith provided information regarding the planning analysis that was done
and mitigating factors that could increase costs to renovate existing “D” building.
Trustee Yuen requested a comparison report that lists all the options considered and estimated
costs. Report should also include staff recommendations. Dr. Ikharo will coordinate with staff
to complete a draft report, which will then be present to the DWFAC for input and discussion.
Final draft will then be brought back to this committee for discussion before final report is
presented to the entire Board.
4. LEASE/LEASEBACK CONSTRUCTION DELIVERY METHODS (Blach
Construction)
Doug Williams, Blach Construction, gave a presentation regarding lease/leaseback project
delivery methods. According to the presentation, lease-leaseback construction projects are
allowable pursuant to the provisions set forth in CA Education Code Section 17406 and 81335
which authorizes school district governing boards to lease property currently owned by a school
district to any person, firm, or corporation so that said other party may construct (or provide for
the construction of) a building or buildings upon the subject property after which the control of
the property and buildings reverts back to the school district. The advantage of this method of
construction is that it allows for a more competitive and transparent bidding and
construction process among the most qualified bidders, it has a proven record of saving
money, and delivering projects in a timely fashion.
Blach’s PowerPoint presentation included the following information:




Background
Current trends
What is LLB and what remains the same under this delivery method
How does this method benefit the District?
Board Facilities & Land Use Planning Committee Meeting
Minutes of 04/11/08 Meeting
Page 3 of 3
Presentation was followed by a question and answer session and discussions on constructability
reviews.
5. LIAISON REPORT - DISTRICT-WIDE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Frank Chong gave a brief update on the status of the District-wide Advisory Committee
meetings. He explained that although the committee hasn’t met this year, due to time constraints
and ‘meeting fatigue” (too many standing manager’s meeting), a meeting is scheduled for next
Thursday, April 17, 2008. Shirley Coaston and Joseph Bielanski both commented on the
importance of meeting regularly to address stakeholders concerns and accreditation issues. Both
Dr. Chong and Dr. Ikharo extended their apologies and stated that they will both make a
commitment to meet on a regular basis.
6. ANNOUNCEMENT
Dr. Chong announced that Laney College will be host to the DBIA/CCFC seminar/workshop
entitled “Design-Build in the California Community Colleges’ on April 23, 2008 from 8:30 am
to 3:30 am. An invitation was extended for committee members to attend.
Meeting Adjourned at 6:05 pm
Note: Due to time constraints and at the request of Trustee Yuen, approval of the 3/7/08
meeting minutes were rolled over to the next meeting