SLC flirts with Dascomb food court proposition

General Faculty planning council enumerates SLC goals, deadlines

At its Thursday meeting the Student Life Committee (SLC) continued discussion on Long Range Planning (LRP) efforts currently being made as part of an ongoing plan to renovate the College.

Committee members first discussed a presentation made to them several weeks ago by Assistant Directors of Residential Life and Services Michele Gross and Dennis Rupert, which enumerated changes the department is thinking of implementing within the College's residence and dining halls over the next few years.

"The most pressing issue is how to alleviate the problem of the Wilder snack bar," Visiting Assistant Professor of Neuroscience Albert Borroni said, referring to the overcrowding and lack of space in one of the campus' most popular hang-out spots.

Gross' proposal suggested that one solution is to convert Dascomb into what Borroni referred to as a "cash-and-carry substitute for the snackbar." The food-court style snackbar, which would allow students to carry out meals, would be added in addition to Dascomb's regular cafeteria. The Wilder Student Union snackbar would continue to serve meals on a points or cash-based system.

Members discussed the merits of the dining hall proposal, which has not been finalized yet. Associate Dean of Student Life and Services Bill Stackman said the snackbar currently serves over 500 students at lunchtime. "We really need to provide a larger space for students," Stackman said. "The Dascomb carry-out option would partly be to accomodate off-campus students. They would get seven board meals a week."

"Traffic would move over to Dascomb because it would be used as a food court model," Diana Roose, assistant to President of the College Nancy Dye, said.

Under the proposal, Dascomb would be open from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily.

"If the whole Dascomb project is going to go, it would go this summer and be in place by next fall. It feels like things are changing every day. People are meeting constantly," Stackman said.

In addition to dining hall renovations, the Committee is undertaking examinations of many other areas of the College which need to be revamped.

A letter sent to the Committee a few weeks ago by Professor of Organ David Boe and other members of the General Faculty Planning Council (GFPC) designated SLC members with specific goals to meet by April 15.

The letter asked SLC to determine which campus committees can best address specific areas in need of change and renovation regarding student space, intramural sports and relations between different communities in Oberlin.

"I think we can certainly do what the letter asks and send out recommendations and blueprints by April 15," Chair of the Committee Jane Armitage, associate professor and chair of theater, said.

Although last week some committee members expressed concern that the letter did not address enough off-campus issues, Armitage said she'd communicated with Boe and cleared up the misunderstanding about the letter's intents. "David said it's inferred that off-campus locations are included in the term 'residential college,'" she said.

This week members discussed campus space as a central theme of all the renovations which need to be made. Members addressed the issue of the lack of hang-out space for students and faculty on campus.

"In terms of spaces where students and faculty can meet in informal ways, I feel like the faculty members can stay in their office and I'd never run into them along the path," sophomore Sarah Fineberg said. "There need to be more eating spaces that don't disgust faculty members so they'll eat there and get to interact more with students."

Associate Professor of Politics Chris Howell felt it isn't just a lack of space that's the problem. "I don't need a place to hang out because I have no time to hang out. What I need is more hang-out time. There are places like the Rice Faculty Lounge where faculty can go, but it's almost always empty because we're worked off our feet," he said.

Professor of Politics Ronald Kahn suggested breaking SLC down into three subcommittees to examine the different issues addressed in the letter. He proposed that the groups should devide to examine issues of pluralism, student-faculty relations and governance and organizations. Members subsequently volunteered to serve on one of the three committees.

Armitage thought the subcommittees were a good idea. "By the time school's done I'd like to be able to say, 'here's how we've broken things down and worked things out for next year,'" she said..