State Designer Selection Board hears BWBR-led team's plan for Moose Tower dental clinic renovation

On May 26, 2026, the State Designer Selection Board interviewed a BWBR-led team bidding for Project 2602, the University of Minnesota’s Moose Tower Dentistry Clinic renovation. The presenters described a June predesign kickoff, phasing strategies to keep the clinic operational during work, and competing HVAC concepts to manage complex vertical distribution systems.

The presentation emphasized balancing historical context and modern clinical needs. Terry Ulrig, principal architect with BWBR, said the team would “respect the historical context of the 19 seventies facility” while pursuing team-based learning, improved patient access and faculty recruitment. Jackie Peck, who identified herself as senior project manager and the team’s main point of contact, said the team plans a June kickoff workshop and aims “at the end of the predesign phase [to have] a clear direction on how we will realize the School of Dentistry’s vision.”

On systems, the team described Moose Tower’s challenge: large air-handling units serving stacked floors and shaft risers that bind floors together. Brian Schmidt, mechanical engineer with Dunham, summarized two high-level approaches: decouple renovation floors with floor-based outdoor-air systems to isolate new work from existing shafts, or maintain centralized shafts and replace large AHUs in phases using temporary systems. The team said each approach carries trade-offs for envelope work, phasing complexity and impacts on non-renovated floors.

Presenters discussed energy benchmarking and targets used to shape early concepts. They reported using the B3 benchmarking tool and cited a preliminary project-specific figure spoken in the interview as “2 0 8 k BTUs per square foot annually.” The team also referenced aligning with an “SP 2030” target that “would require reducing that number to approximately 35,” but the transcript does not specify the units or meaning of “approximately 35.” The presentation also referenced establishing an “SB 20 30 baseline with CSBR” and early meetings with building-code officials as critical predesign steps; those acronyms were spoken in the interview and not expanded there.

The team described program moves by floor: a reconfigured Level 3 front door with reception and concierge; a consolidated preclinical simulation hub on Level 4; pediatric and specialty-care refinements on clinical floors; and Level 8 as a comprehensive-care hub to support education and future upgrades. On equipment, the presenters outlined a procurement workflow: develop guide plates, gather stakeholder input, evaluate manufacturers and align utility requirements with engineers, then coordinate ordering, delivery and in-field verification with the construction manager.

Panel members pressed on team availability, cost estimating and constructability. A university questioner (Paul) asked about consultant roles; Jackie Peck said many consultants were past partners and confirmed BWBR would serve as the architect of record and that she would manage team coordination. When asked about cost control, presenters stressed accounting for areas adjacent to renovation zones, factoring contingencies early, and close coordination with the construction manager; presenters named JE Dunn as the construction manager included for preconstruction estimating on the team.

On lessons learned, the team cited tight-site constraints and coordination with neighboring parties at a previous Boston University project, and hidden existing conditions (unrecorded rebar and cabling) at other projects that required scanning to find penetrations for utilities. They said those discoveries underscore the need for early investigation and realistic contingencies.

The board closed the interview after questions. The chair said the executive secretary will notify firms about the board’s selections; the State Designer Selection Board selects two firms to forward to the University of Minnesota for final consideration.

What’s next: the board will complete remaining interviews and then select two firms that will be forwarded to the university for a final decision. The executive secretary is expected to notify teams following the board’s selection process.