Selection board shortlists three firms to interview for University of Minnesota Moose Health Tower dentistry renovation

The State Designer Selection Board on May 12 voted to interview three firms — identified in the procurement as firms B, C and F — for Project 2602, the University of Minnesota’s Moose Health/Health Sciences Tower dentistry renovation.

Paul Lawton, the university’s project representative, told the board the work will modernize and consolidate teaching and clinical spaces in the 1970s-era tower, incorporate an additional 30,000 square feet beyond earlier feasibility work, and resolve aging infrastructure and MEP coordination challenges. “The main push of this project is obviously the renewal and modernization of the school of dentistry,” Lawton said, adding the project aims to improve wayfinding and the patient and instructional experience.

The board reviewed seven proposals and discussed each team’s dental expertise, equipment-planning capacity, approach to phasing and references to the 2022 feasibility study. Members repeatedly pressed for clarity on team composition, specific past projects behind submitted images, and how firms planned to handle equipment coordination and code-triggering constraints such as the university’s “rule of disturbance,” which can require bringing an entire floor to current code if more than 50% of it is disturbed.

On process, the board followed its usual practice: a motion (moved and seconded in open session) to interview three firms with a 20-minute presentation and 20-minute question-and-answer period carried on a voice vote. The clerk reported the individual ballot counts for each lettered firm: firm A 0, B 5, C 6, D 0, E 2, F 5, G 0. By that tally, firms B, C and F were selected for interviews scheduled in two weeks.

Board members said the shortlisted firms offered complementary strengths: one was praised for particularly strong dental consulting and team integration, another for MEP and equipment coordination expertise, and a third for familiarity with the campus and the 2022 feasibility study. Paul Lawton noted any shortlisted firm will be asked to explain staffing allocations and how it would manage the project’s complex phasing and equipment demands during interviews.

The board also confirmed routine housekeeping items — approving the meeting agenda and the Feb. 17 minutes — and heard no conflicts of contact reported by the university about proposers. The chair adjourned the meeting after confirming the interview schedule and thanking the university and reviewers.

Next steps: the board will conduct interviews with firms B, C and F, then return to consider interview results before making a formal selection recommendation.