Oakland University Senate
Third Meeting
November 16, 2000
Minutes
Members present: Andrews, Braunstein, Brieger, Buffard-O'Shea, Chapman, Coppin, Early, J. Eberwein, Esposito, Fink, Grossman, Hildebrand, MacKinder, Marks, McNair, D. Moore, K. Moore, Moran, Mosby, Riley, Rozek, Russell, Schochetman, R. Schwartz, Sen, Sevilla, Stamps, Sudol, Wood; K. Cole for Ginger, K. Langley for Kochenderfer
Members absent: Abraham, Alber, Benson, Blanks, Carter, Didier, Dow, Downing, Estes, Gardner, Gilroy, Haskell, Herman, Kleckner, Laski, Long, McIntosh, Nakao, Olson, Otto, Pfeiffer, Polis, Rusek, Shablin, Sharma, Sieloff
Summary of actions:
1. Approval of minutes. (Ms. Wood, Mr. Schwartz) Approved.
2. Information items:
a. Master Planning update-Ms. Schaefer
b. Nursing/Health Sciences Task Force update-Mr. Connellan
c. Academic calendar discussion
d. International Studies Task Force report
3. Motion to staff Senate standing committees (Mr. Braunstein, Mr. Mayer) Approved.
4. Motion to endorse the Enrollment Plan 1999-2010 Draft Recommendation (Ms. Moore, Mr. Schwartz) First reading
5. Motion to allow 2000-2001 matriculating students to use the 1999-2000 catalog. (Mr. Brieger, Mr. Russell) Approved following approval of a motion to waive the second reading (Mr. Russell, Ms. Wood)
6. Motion to endorse the expansion of the western reserve natural area. (Mr. Russell, Ms. Wood) First reading.
After calling the meeting to order at 3:15 Mr. Esposito called for consideration of the minutes of October 19th. The minutes were then approved, following a motion by Ms. Wood and a second by Mr. Schwartz. Mr. Grossman raised a question concerning the previous meeting when votes were taken even though a quorum wasn't present. He reminded the group that the new Senate rules approved in September require a quorum be present for any votes. Mr. Esposito agreed and indicated that we will follow the procedures from now on and then ruled that the votes taken last month will stand. Ms. Wood asked about the status of the International Studies Task Force report and Mr. Esposito replied that copies of the report had been received by his office and have been distributed to various Senate committees for consideration.
Master Plan
Ms. Schaefer then presented the latest on the Master Planning process. She reviewed what has happened so far. This included:
--the establishment of the Master Planning process by the Board,
--the development of planning principles (that there should be a single academic core campus, a pedestrian environment, that like disciplines should be clustered together, the need for additional student housing, development should reflect the University's values and unique site,);
--the development of design principles (the need to maintain the green perimeter around campus yet make the campus visible from off-campus, that the campus should be a pedestrian environment with parking and the roads on the perimeter, three-story or higher buildings to save ground space and provide visibility from off campus, that natural areas and green space are a distinguishing characteristic of OU).
Ms. Wood congratulated the Task Force for their work and stressed the importance of maintaining the existing nature areas for pedagogic purposes. Mr. Stamps spoke of the need to respect and maintain the historic connections to the Meadowbrook estate, noting that strip malls and office buildings will come and go, but the barns and other structures are unique to Oakland. Ms. Schaefer agreed, stating that we need both to maintain the connection with historic foundation and to build on it.
Ms. Schaefer then presented a map which delineated potential building sites. With regard to Campus Map #1: Main Campus Potential Building Sites , she made the following points:
1. Should cluster like academic disciplines - 3 sites identified for future growth in sciences, engineering, health sciences, nursing
2. Need visibility from off campus - 2 sites that frame the front entrance
3. Site identified for possible future expansion of SBA
4. Addition to SFH identified for future expansion/consolidation of Humanities
5. Performing Arts facility site linked to renovated Varner Hall
6. Site selected for new Education and Human Services Building
7. Another undefined building site adjacent to O'Dowd
8. Critical mass for housing - Phases I and 2 for student apartments identified, residence hall site identified between GHC and VBH.
9. Student services expansion sites - at OC and NFH
10. Facilities services expansion site to move support functions away from core campus.
Mr. Herman asked about the possible expansion of the Oakland Center and Ms. Schaefer agreed to update the map to show that option. Mr. Stamps indicated the need to identify historic structures, such as the Belgian barn, and maintain them, rather than expanding by tearing them down and replacing them with modern buildings.
Turning next to Campus Map #2: Main Campus Open Space and Parking Sites, she highlighted the following concepts:
1. Green spaces as a distinguishing characteristic - Open spaces identified at Beer Lake and at front entrance
2. Athletic and recreational outdoor playfields should be retained
3. Potential sites for parking expansion - more input to come from parking consultant
She indicated that parking issues were delegated to a Parking Subcommittee which has been working with a consultant as well as gathering input from the campus constituencies in preparation for writing their report which is due later this month. A question was raised about the safety issues that might arise if the proposed parking structure on the corner of Walton and Squirrel were to be built. A preference was expressed for a parking structure in the area south of the library. The parking structures would probably be three stories tall.
Moving on to the more controversial Campus Map #3: OU Campus Potential Facility Sites, the following points were made:
1. Natural areas have been designated at south end of campus, consistent with University Senate recommendation
2. National Historic Register District designated to be maintained (area around Meadowbrook Hall)
3. Potential Hotel/Conference Center site identified (northeast corner)
4. Research and development park identified at southwest campus, with potential future expansion site
5. Location for a possible convocation center/ arena identified (southeast corner of Lonedale)
Ms. Buffard-O'Shea expressed concern about the area along the east side of Squirrel Road that was intended to remain natural and which is slated for possible expansion of an R & D park. Ms. Shaefer replied that the land along Squirrel is valuable and developable, that the R & D park at the southwest corner of the campus is consistent with the university's vision, and that the strip along Squirrel will be held as a natural area as long as possible, but the reality is, that it will grow in value and may provide needed funds for the university at some future date. She responded to a query about maintaining a greenbelt around the campus by explaining that the R & D park would consist of scattered buildings, not intensive development of the property. Ms. Buffard-O'Shea commented that the purpose of the Senate resolution was to preserve the area and to ensure that the natural area would not be disturbed and wondered why more development wasn't planned for the east side of campus. Ms. Schaefer responded that the east side is not as accessible and that the university must weigh and balance all the interests and figure out what is best for the institution. Ms. Alber pointed out that we need to remember our primary mission and that these areas are important to the academic mission of Oakland, both for research and teaching activities. Ms. McNair seconded her concerns, stating that these areas are used as labs for science teachers; she added that large natural areas are necessary for wildlife and flora. Ms. Schaefer interjected that the Task Force also values the importance of maintaining large open areas. A Student Congress representative stated that the Congress had unanimously passed a resolution against developing the area along Squirrel.
Mr. Russell distributed a map of campus showing a proposed expansion of the natural area that was the subject of last year's January 20th Senate resolution and a map of the trails that were proposed at that time. He asked how soon the trails would be added to the maps and the status of the trails, noting that some of the trails will require bridges over the wet areas. Ms. Schaefer responded that Mr. DeKamp and Mr. Rogers should have a report ready for the next Senate meeting.
Returning to consideration of map 3, Mr. Brieger asked about the possible arena site on the west side and suggested it might be a good idea to consolidate that function with the hotel/conference center slated for the corner of Adams and Walton, which would leave more of the area on the west side of campus natural. Ms. Schaefer indicated that the northwest corner of campus probably doesn't have room for an arena. There's an enormous tech park just outside of OU's boundaries, noted Mr. Riley, adding that much of Oakland's value resides in the green spaces the campus provides. Ms. Wood spoke in favor of the expansion of the natural area, pointing out that the visions of partnerships and collaboration between OU and the tech park have not developed as we thought they would. Noting that there isn't any problem with designating the extreme southwest corner for an R & D park, Mr. Sevilla suggested that a lot of development could be sited there and the part designated on Mr. Russell's map could be left natural. The Task Force sees things differently reported Mr. Esposito. Unlike many campuses the OU endowment isn't all that great and the land is a valuable asset and may be helpful in generating revenue for academic programs. Mr. Moran indicated that he isn't enamoured with the plan and asked about guarantees that the areas currently designated as natural areas remain as such in perpetuity. Ms. Schaefer responded that the Task Force's intent is to leave them undeveloped but one can't force that view on a future Board of Trustees. Mr. Grossman pointed out that the January resolution of the Senate was clearly intended to mean that the two areas appearing on the map distributed at that time were to be undeveloped, not that any two areas could be designated as undeveloped. Mr. Esposito indicated that the Senate's concerns will be included as part of the final report.
Mr. Connellan then provided a brief update on the Nursing/Health Sciences Task Force. They have been meeting, conducting interviews and making site visits and plan to have a report ready next month.
Turning to other matters, the proposed changes in the academic calendar was the next item discussed, based on a request from the Undergraduate Committee for Instruction for further consideration of this issue. The students reported the mixed views of their constitutency; some students are worried about getting ready for graduation while in the throes of final exams and also would like to maintain the outdoors venue; others liked the new calendar. The possibility of a January graduation was considered but it was felt that students might not return for it. Ms. Eberwein was worried about losing the Tuesday night class. Mr. Esposito indicated that he has no vested interest in this but thought it a good idea to explore whether or not an alternative calendar might be desirable.
Having taken care of the information items, the Senate then turned to the first item of business, prefacing the discussion with its first roll call to establish that a quorum was present. With 32 Senators responding, a bare quorum, Mr. Braunstein then moved, and Mr. Mayer seconded a procedural motion to appoint those individuals listed in the agenda to the Senate Standing Committee specified. The motion was approved.
Ms. Moore then moved, seconded by Mr. Schwartz, that the Senate endorse the Enrollment Planning 1999 - 2010:Draft Recommendation. With the floor open for discussion, Mr. Esposito remarked that the Senate might endorse the report as is, or it might endorse it with certain qualifications. Mr. Brieger thought the projected residential population of 2500 was too modest. Mr. Sevilla responded that having more students living on campus adds to the campus life and vibrancy and the Committee thought that 2500 was a reasonable goal. He indicated this could change with time and was not intended to be a limit. He also stated that adding students has implications for the infrastructure and that it might be a good idea for the Senate to formulate a resolution concerning the need for additional support. Mr. Kochenderfer indicated the students were also concerned about this.
With no further discussion forthcoming about the enrollment plan, the Senate then dealt with several good and welfare items.
In light of the delay with this year's undergraduate catalog, Mr. Brieger, seconded by Mr. Russell moved that the Senate approve the following resolution:
WHEREAS the 2000-2001 Undergraduate Catalog has yet to be issued in print form;
WHEREAS registration for the Winter 2001 semester began on November 13, 2000;
WHEREAS graduation requirements are established by the faculties of the schools and college for specific degree programs and by the university faculty via the University Senate for university-wide general degree requirements; and
WHEREAS the faculty via the University Senate has established the policy of allowing students to fulfill degree requirements using any catalog in effect since their matriculation at Oakland University providing that catalog is not more than six years old at the time of graduation;
BE IT RESOLVED that any student matriculating at Oakland University during the 2000-2001 academic year may elect to use the graduation requirements in the 1999-2000 Undergraduate Catalog for any graduation date on or before the end of the 2006-2007 academic year.
Ms. Eberwein stated that UCUI has consulted with the Registrar and this is what was recommended. Mr. Russell, seconded by Ms. Wood, moved to waive the second reading. That motion was approved by the requisite 3/4 majority and the resolution was then unanimously approved by the Senate.
Ms. Buffard-O'Shea brought up the bookstore again, noting that the foreign books needed for her winter classes have not been ordered yet and that they normally take 6-8 weeks to arrive. She added that the Textbook Outlet has already ordered all the books she submitted and that the OU bookstore should view foreign books as a priority order since they take longer to arrive.
And finally, Mr. Russell moved that the Senate endorse his proposal to enlarge the natural area on the west side of campus. Ms. Wood seconded. The motion will receive its second reading at the December meeting. Mr. Esposito then invited a motion to adjourn, several individuals complied and the meeting adjourned at 5:15.
Submitted by
Linda L. Hildebrand
Secretary to the University Senate
12/5/00