Full submission - Office of Planning & Budgeting (OPB) - University ...

Statement of Qualifications 

Architectural Design Services 

Project Number 203928 

Animal 

Research and 

Care Facility 

University of 

Washington 

LMN/Ballinger 

12 July 2012 

Architecture 

Urban Design 

Interiors

Wisconsin 

Institutes for 

Discovery, 

University of 

Wisconsin 

(Ballinger)

UW Animal Research and Care Facility | iii 

Architecture 

Urban Design 

Interiors

iv | LMN + BALLINGER

Table of Contents 

Facing Page: PACCAR Hall, Foster School of Business, 

University of Washington, Seattle (LMN) 

1 

5 

31 

35 

41 

47 

51 

57 

71 

75 

81 

85 

Cover Letter 

UW Animal Research and Care Facility | v 

Relevant Experience of the Firm 

Ability to Manage Schedule and Budget 

Programming and Concept 

Development Experience 

Project Management Approach 

Permitting and Other Regulatory 

Knowledge 

Sustainable Design Experience 

Staff Experience and Availability 

Quality Assusrace Plan 

MWBE Outreach Plan 

References 

Acceptance of University’s Standard 

Contracts

vi | LMN + BALLINGER

1 

Cover Letter 

UW Animal Research and Care Facility | vii 

Facing Page: Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery, University of 

Wisconsin, Madison, WI (Ballinger)

801 Second Avenue, Suite 501 

July 12, 2012 

Seattle, Washington 98104 

Attn: Kurt Jensen 

Capital Projects Office 

University of Washington 

University Facilities Building 

Box 352205 

Seattle, WA 98195-2205 

Re: Statement of Qualifications for Architectural Services 

UW Animal Research and Care Facility Phase 1 

Dear Kurt and Members of the Selection Committee, 

T 206 682 3460 

The UW Animal Research and Care Facility Phase 1 presents many unique opportunities and challenges, 

with respect to both vivarium design as well as integration with campus infrastructure and public spaces. 

The LMN-Ballinger team is particularly well qualified to successfully address the challenges and take full 

advantage of the opportunities to dramatically enhance the UW’s research capabilities for decades to 

come. As such, we are very enthusiastic to submit our qualifications for this extraordinary project. 

As one of the world’s leading vivarium architects, Ballinger has designed vivariums for premier clients 

such as Cornell University, the University of Pennsylvania, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 

Ohio State University and the University of Wisconsin. Ballinger has rich experience in the significant 

programmatic issues involved in the UW Animal Research and Care Facility including: 

• Design of vivariums that accommodate a diversity of animal species, 

• Providing the highest possible degree of flexibility in altering the function of program spaces and in 

adapting to changes in animal species, 

• Creating designs that are durable and which support cost effective processes, and 

• Understanding the particular requirements of locating a vivarium below a research tower. 

As a Seattle architect nationally recognized for design of higher education facilities, LMN has a 

distinguished record of major public facility projects within our region and—most notably—on the 

UW campus. Throughout many years of engagement with the University, LMN has developed a deep 

understanding and insight into the Seattle campus—encompassing academic and research programs, 

systems infrastructure, community issues, architectural aspirations, landscape, and open spaces. We are 

proud of how our projects have contributed to the success and advancement of their programs, as well 

as to the overall campus experience. Recent project examples include the Foster School of Business and 

the Allen Center for Computer Science & Engineering. 

Jacobs Consultancy is the third member of our core team. Jacobs has programmed, planned, and 

executed over 100 research animal facilities, encompassing more than 3,000,000 square feet of 

vivarium space. The firm has a broad range of experience with barrier, containment space, specialty 

cores, and investigator access. Some of the most recent innovations in animal facility design include 

techniques to control operating and per diem costs; protocols to maintain expandable/contractible 

barriers; integration of vented racks with building mechanical systems; and partial interstitial space. 

Jacobs shares a long-standing working relationship with Ballinger, including collaborations on large, 

complex vivarium and research facilities that share many similar characteristics with the UW Animal 

F 206 343 9388 

www.lmnarchitects.com 

Architecture 

Urban Design 

Interiors

2 | LMN + BALLINGER 

Research and Care Facility. For example, the firms collaborated on the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia 

Colket Translational Research Building in which a 1,000,000 SF research tower was constructed as 

Phase 2 above a 275,000 SF below-grade vivarium that was Phase 1. Jacobs’ participation will help 

ensure continuity in the programming, planning and design process that will be extremely valuable to 

successfully address the unique, complex conditions of the assignment. 

Our team is organized as a collaboration tailored to the special circumstances of the project. Ballinger 

will be responsible for the design of the vivarium and related support facilities. Jacobs will lead laboratory 

programming and planning. LMN will be the prime architect, responsible for overall project management, 

contract documents, permitting, and construction administration. Given the firm’s extensive history of 

involvement with major open spaces and vistas on the UW campus, LMN will also play a key role in the 

integration of the new facilities with the Portage Bay Vista and overall campus relationships. 

The LMN-Ballinger team possesses the capacity to deliver this project in accordance with your budget 

and schedule. We acknowledge having reviewed Addendum #1 to the RFQ found at the Capital Projects 

Office website. Our contact regarding questions about this SOQ and scheduling a potential interview is 

Dean Clark, Principal, LMN Architects, 801 2nd Avenue, Suite 501, Seattle WA 98104, (206) 682-3460, 

dclark@lmnarchitects.com. 

The predesign study will be a critical step towards the realization of the vision established in the UW 

ARC Facility Master Plan, requiring extraordinary dedication, enthusiasm and creativity in addition to the 

highly specialized design expertise. We would be honored to part of this exciting endeavor and hope this 

submittal is the beginning of an extended and productive dialogue. We appreciate your consideration of 

the LMN-Ballinger team and would welcome the opportunity to further present our qualifications and 

approach in an interview. 

Sincerely, 

George Shaw, AIA Terry Steelman, FAIA 

Partner in Charge, LMN Principal in Charge, Ballinger

2 

Relevant 

Experience of 

the Firm 

UW Animal Research and Care Facility | 3

4 | LMN + BALLINGER

Firm Profile 

LMN Architects 



(206) 682-3460 


Located in Seattle and founded in 1979, LMN provides 

design services in architecture, urban design and 

interiors for a wide variety of public and private clients. 

Our projects are extremely diverse — in terms of 

project type, scale, user communities and conditions 

of place. We embrace this diversity as a core strength, 

and have organized our 85-person firm around projectspecific 

teams carefully assembled to address the 

specific needs and circumstances of each assignment. 

To ensure continuity of approach, consistently high 

quality and continued development of innovative design 

investigation, project teams are supported by extensive 

research, design and technical specialists. 

People 

Led by six partners who are actively engaged in our 

project work as a fundamental aspect of our culture, 

we are a group of architects, urban designers, and 

interior designers who possess an extraordinary depth 

of experience and expertise in programming, master 

planning, design and project delivery. Passionately 

committed to an integrated design process, we 

continually strive to make our work highly responsive to 

the needs of our clients and enriching to the lives of the 

people and communities it serves. 

Design 

We aspire to create built environments that question, 

rethink, and improve on the status quo. Each design 

seeks a critical integration of the fundamental form 

givers—program, site and spatial experience—informed 

by craftsmanship, materiality and sustainability. We 

believe design is pervasive, encompassing all aspects 

of our work and involving all project participants. Our 

approach entails collaborative exploration with our 

consultant team, clients and users, seeking progressive 

discoveries, innovative design solutions and compelling 

architectural expression rooted in the unique substance 

of each project. 

Environmental Responsibility 

LMN promotes environmental responsibility through 

our practice of sustainable design and the application 

of “green” measures in the ongoing operation of the 

firm. LMN has been a carbon neutral organization since 

2008. As a core aspect of this commitment, we officially 

adopted the 2030 Challenge and AIA 2030 Commitment 

in 2009. In support of this commitment we have 

developed in-house computational modeling expertise 

and protocol to analyze alternative design solutions for 

UW Animal Research and Care Facility | 5 

sustainability metrics throughout the design process. 

Our process goes beyond the LEED evaluation system 

to ensure that environmental principles are carefully 

integrated into the entire process, from concept design 

through technical development, project delivery and 

occupancy. 

Management and Technical Expertise 

LMN embraces effective project management and 

industry-leading technical expertise as essential 

components to high quality design and effective project 

delivery. A hallmark of our firm is the demonstrated 

capacity to design and deliver successfully a broad range 

of highly complex public projects. From large-scale urban 

landmark buildings to small-scale community projects, 

our integrated design approach and management 

process have a proven track record of effective cost 

control and schedule management. To ensure consistent 

quality of design and technical solutions, we employ a 

proactive system of quality assurance from the outset 

of the project —administered by our full-time QA 

Director. This process engages the LMN project team 

and sub-consultants in interactive framework of design 

coordination and document checking, applying advanced 

design technology tools in a highly organized, systematic 

manner. 

Design Technology 

LMN utilizes Building Information Modeling (BIM) 

as part of an overall framework of computational 

modeling that is completely integrated with our 

design and documentation process. In addition to 

enhancing the level of coordination between design 

disciplines and building systems, LMN is at the 

forefront of “GreenBIM”—the application of BIM to 

run environmental simulations (light, heat, air flow, 

energy consumption) in order to predict and improve 

building performance. To this end, we have developed 

interoperability links between various software programs 

and simulation engines to effectively utilize iterative 

modeling and simulation during all phases of design. 

Our expertise with design technology goes beyond 

simulation. We are also actively engaged with parametric 

modeling and digital fabrication, using Grasshopper, 

Generative Components, and Autodesk Inventor. As an 

organic part of our design process, parametric modeling 

directly links design intent and geometry, allowing us 

to create form, as well as explore and solve geometrical 

problems. Taking a parametric approach to geometric 

form also allows us unparalleled control over the quality 

and fidelity of our models, a critical aspect of digital 

fabrication and rapid prototyping at our practice.


LMN 

Foster School of Business 

Phases I & II 

University of Washington, Seattle, WA 

Scope / Date 

196,000 gsf / $143M / 2010 & 2012 

The Foster School of Business is located at the convergence of 

disparate campus plans and existing buildings. PACCAR Hall is 

the first phase of a multi-phase project to transform the current 

collection of outdated business school facilities into a cohesive, 

interconnected education complex. The design interweaves 

program and community space in support of the school’s highly 

interactive, entrepreneurial culture—and extends that experience 

to engage the life of the broader campus. 

The design responds to the program’s strong emphasis on social 

connectivity and its active central campus site with a high degree 

of porosity—in terms of both visual and functional relationships. 

A four story, day lit atrium runs the entire length of PACCAR 

Hall. Multiple entrances are knitted into the pedestrian flow of 

the campus, with views, topography and landscape embraced 

as integrated elements in the architectural experience. The 

exterior expression is a direct response to the functional needs of 

modern business education and environmental influences, while 

responding to adjacent historic campus buildings with compatible 

materiality, scale and proportion.

LMN 

Paul G. Allen Center for Computer 

Science & Engineering 

University of Washington, Seattle, WA 

Scope / Date 

187,000 gsf / $45M / 2003 

The design responds to an unusual tear in campus fabric 

(previously unfinished building project), an adjacent historic tree 

grove, and the University of Washington’s Computer Science & 

Engineering department’s entrepreneurial culture to create a 

highly interactive, flexible environment that supports innovative, 

interdisciplinary research activities. 

The “L-shaped” plan adjoins the existing building to form a daylighted 

internal courtyard that functions as a cafe, central gathering 

area and multi-purpose events space. Research workrooms, offices 

and classrooms, computer laboratories and administrative spaces 

are laterally organized to reinforce the Center’s collaborative 

investigations and continually evolving team structures. 

The architectural expression—through use of materiality, scale, 

proportion and detail—mediates between the neo-gothic character 

of older central campus buildings and the modern functionality 

of the program. A system of external sunshades forms a vertical 

trellis that eliminates problematic glare and optimizes day-lighting 

of computer-intensive offices. 



LMN 

Biotechnology & Life Sciences 

Building 

Washington State University, Pullman, WA 

Scope / Date 

130,000 gsf / $27M / 2009 

11,100 sf Vivarium (rodents) 

WSU’s interdisciplinary research complex is envisioned to become 

an internationally-recognized facility that promotes scientific 

collaborations and enhances overall economic development 

throughout the region. The precinct master plan defines 

development parameters and design guidelines for six research 

buildings that will encompass a wide range of programs, such as 

molecular biology, agriculture and veterinary medicine sciences. 

Alternating “L-shaped” buildings are positioned as links in a chain, 

forming a circulation and service spine to provide shared use of 

core lab support facilities, as well as cultivate interaction between 

research groups. 

LMN designed the second research building within the master 

plan. The building design is organized around an open lab 

concept that integrates highly flexible technical systems with 

both distributed and core support functions, optimizing program 

flexibility for research in molecular biosciences, integrated 

biotechnology and reproductive biology.


Ballinger 

833 Chestnut Street, Suite 1400 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107 

(215) 446-0900 

www.ballinger-ae.com 

Ballinger was one of the first firms in the country 

to merge the disciplines of architecture and 

engineering into a professional practice. Our single 

office in Philadelphia houses a staff of over 250 

people, comprising three architectural studios, 

two multidisciplinary engineering studios, and an 

interiors studio. Ballinger has made interdisciplinary 

design excellence the centerpiece of our firm culture, 

and today, we are nationally recognized leaders in 

academic, research, healthcare, and corporate planning 

and design. Building on a strong legacy of innovation, 

Ballinger is committed to the thoughtful integration of 

technology, a deep knowledge of our building types, 

and exceptional client service. 

We take pride in designing elegant places that 

contribute to the intellectual enrichment, research 

discovery, and medical advancements that drive our 

economies, and we diligently push for solutions that 

tread lightly on our environment. Our work has been 

celebrated and recognized with numerous regional and 

national awards, and publications. 

We endeavor to create buildings that respond to the 

needs, values, and contexts of the people who occupy 

them, and the institutions, cities and landscapes 

to which they belong. We seek to design enduring 

buildings of purpose and imagination. We believe in the 

power of collaboration, and we savor the opportunities 

to work with clients who share our passion for 

discovery. Ballinger’s interdisciplinary design teams 

partner with our clients in a patient search to frame 

a vision for each project - a vision which honors the 

unique mission, cultures, and imagery of our clients, 

and inspires the collective team to develop ideas that 

rise above expectation. 

Our integrated teams are led by principals who actively 

participate in the design and delivery of the work of 

the practice. Our desire to create buildings of ideas, 

craft and innovation is reinforced by our strength of 

expertise and commitment to quality. We believe that 

every project has the ability to better our communal 

lives. 


Design Excellence 

Ballinger has established a reputation for designing 

exceptional buildings for clients with complex programs 

and high expectations for quality architecture. Our work 

has focused on institutions that position themselves 

as leaders in their endeavors, are innovative, and 

recognize the value architecture and design have in 

advancing their mission. Our approach to design is a 

highly collaborative effort intent on understanding the 

client’s mission, goals and desires for a given project 

and translating those expectations into an environment 

that is not simply a functional, but an exceptional 

place. Consequently, the firm has been recognized with 

numerous regional and national awards in the last 20 

years. 

Professional Services 

To each project a multi-disciplinary team brings 

capabilities drawn from the firm’s staff of 

programmers, planners, architects, interior designers, 

and engineers. Services include: 

Planning 

• Programming 

• Facility Master Planning 

• Facility Assessment & Analysis 

• Lab & Healthcare Planning 

Architecture and Interior Design 

• Architectural Design 

• Interior Design 

• Lighting Design 

• Furniture & Finish Selection 

• Sustainable Design / LEED 

Engineering 

• Structural 

• Mechanical 

• Plumbing & Fire Protection 

• Electrical 

• Sustainable Design / LEED 

• Information Technology


Ballinger 

The Children’s Hospital of 

Philadelphia 

Colket Translational Research Building 

Philadelphia, PA 

Cornell University 

East Campus Research Facility 

Ithaca,NY 

University of Wisconsin 

Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery 

Madison, WI 

The Wistar Institute 

New Research Tower 


Ethicon Endo-Surgery Institute 

Research + Training Center 

Cincinnati, OH 

University of Pennsylvania 

Vernon + Shirley Hill Pavilion 


Virginia Commonwealth University 

Molecular Medicine Research Building 

Richmond, VA 

Brown University 

Sidney E. Frank Hall for Life Sciences 

Providence, RI 

Temple University 

Medical Education + Research Building 


Scope 

Research 

581,000sf 

$240M • 

90,000sf 

$40M • 

330,000sf 

$165M • 

Species 

Flexibility 

Procedure Space 

Regulatory Compliance 

Planning for Vertical 

Expansion 

Rodents 

Primates • • • • 

Rodents 

Dogs 

Aquatics 

Marmota 

• • • 

Rodents 

Aquatics • • • 

100,000sf 

$65M • Rodents • • • 

160,000sf 

$32M • Swine • • • 

125,000sf 

$38M • Rodents • • • 

125,000sf 

$50M • Rodents • • 

173,000sf 

$68M • 

Mice 

Primates • • • 

487,000sf 

$130M • Rodents • • •

Ballinger (w/ Jacobs Consultancy) 

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia 


Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

Scope 

581,000 sf / $240M 

Related Features 

• Research facility 

• Designed for flexibility 

• Procedure space 

• Regulatory compliance 

• Planning for vertical expansion 

Species 

• Rodents 

• Primates 

The new research tower for The Children’s Hospital of 

Philadelphia is the first step in creating a unique, identifiable 

South campus that expands biomedical research, clinical 

research, ambulatory care, office and support facilities. 

Having participated in the South campus planning process, 

Ballinger implemented the Master Plan’s research initiative - 

the design of 1,000,000 SF of basic research and biomedical 

research, supported by a 275,000 SF below-grade vivarium. 

The new building occupies a prominent urban site across 

from the Main Campus and represents CHOP’s commitment 

to accelerate the process of converting scientific discoveries 

into actual treatments. Flexible, state-of-the-art labs cater to 

researchers in the areas of cancer, diabetes, epilepsy, blindness, 

and hemophilia. 

Laboratory research is supported by a large vivarium housing 

200 primates as well as multiple rodent species, procedure and 

surgical space, and sophisticated imaging suites. The entire 

project was planned for vertical expansion to 29 floors. 



Ballinger 



Ithaca, New York 

Scope 

90,000 sf / $40M 






Species 

• Rodents 

• Dogs 

• Aquatics 

• Marmots 

Ballinger helped master plan the University’s campus-wide 

animal facility strategy involving more than 100 existing satellite 

animal facilities. The primary outcome is the consolidation of 

existing facilities into two major vivarium hubs. 

Ballinger designed the first of those hubs, the East Campus 

Research Facility, a multi-species vivarium and research facility 

for nearly 50,000 transgenic and/ or immuno-compromised 

mice/rats. The new building provides housing and procedure 

space, in a “suite” concept, for the barrier (transgenic) facility on 

one level, and for “conventional” animals, including larger species, 

ranging from dogs to chickens, to aquatics, to marmota, on two 

other levels. The building links directly to an existing research 

tower creating synergies between the two, and anticipating 

its role as a long-term resource for occupants of multiple 

surrounding buildings.

Ballinger 


Facility Master Plan & New Research Tower 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

Scope 

100,000 sf / $65M 






Species 

• Rodents 

The Wistar Institute, the nation’s oldest private biomedical research 

institution, is expanding its facilities for cancer research and vaccine 

development through a new seven-story research tower. 

In addition to the design of this research building, Ballinger 

provided existing facility assessment, master planning and 

programming to determine the best solution for Wistar to 

expand its research operations, recruit new faculty, and pursue 

collaborative biomedical research in emerging areas of science. 

Currently under construction, five floors of the tower are 

dedicated to laboratories focused on team science and 

multidisciplinary interactivity. Wistar developed the first research 

animal model, the “Wistar rat”, from which nearly 50% of the 

world’s research rats today are descended. So redesigning/ 

relocating the vivarium demanded extraordinary sensitivity 

to external influences such as noise and vibration, as well as 

disruption to ongoing activity. 



Ballinger 


Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery 

Madison, Wisconsin 

Scope 

330,000 sf / $165M 






Species 

• Rodents 

• Aquatics 

On behalf of the University and the Wisconsin Alumni Research 

Foundation (WARF), Ballinger programmed and designed one of 

the nation’s most unique interdisciplinary research institutes. 

The 330,000 SF first phase, located in the geographic center of 

the sciences “precinct” in Madison, supports research ranging 

from engineering to computer sciences to biology. The 50,000 

SF research floors are organized into “neighborhoods” and 

accommodate interdisciplinary teams in an open, collaborative 

environment. Specialty core labs to support the Institute’s 

research mission are located on lower level of the building. 

A 27,000 SF vivarium is housed entirely below grade outside the 

building’s footprint and linked to the Discovery building via an 

underground tunnel. The detachment of the vivarium enables 

long-term expansion for future research facility development. 

Currently, species including rodents and aquatic animals are 

housed. 

This new facility was recently awarded R&D Magazine’s 

prestigious 2012 Lab of the Year award.

Ballinger 



Cincinnati, Ohio 

Scope 

160,000 sf / $32M 






Species 

• Swine 

The facility includes training classrooms and bioskills labs 

for visiting surgeons and their staff, inhouse research and 

development labs, and a 40,000 SF vivarium. 

This center is connected to an existing administration/ 

engineering/ manufacturing facility by a new link that 

incorporates expansion of the existing employee cafeteria and a 

separate dining room, for visitors. The building’s public spaces 

are organized around a monumental stair and lobby area, which is 

lit from above by three large skylights. Ballinger has also designed 

the new corporate headquarters which was constructed as a 

future phase and physically linked to this building. 

The vivarium houses primarily pigs, whose anatomy is 

particularly comparable to humans for laparoscopic/ endoscopic 

procedures, and for whom housing and care requires unique 

expertise. 



Jacobs Consultancy 



(206) 682-3460 



Jacobs Consultancy Inc. (formerly known as GPR 

Planners Collaborative, Inc.), is a nationally recognized 

consulting firm specializing in the programming, 

planning, and design of research and instructional 

laboratories. Jacobs Consultancy, the Laboratory 

Planning Practice of Jacobs Engineering Group Inc, has 

continued to grow steadily since 1978 from its offices in 

New York, California and New Jersey, with professionals 

who possess diverse backgrounds in architecture, 

planning, and science. Jacobs Consultancy has planned 

and designed over 250 laboratory facilities, totaling over 

50,000,000 square feet, for institutional, corporate 

and governmental clientele and averages 2.5-3 million 

assignable square feet of lab and vivarium planning per 

year. 

Over the past 35 years, Jacobs Consultancy Inc (JCI) 

has programmed, planned and executed over 100 

research animal facilities, more than 3,000,000 square 

feet of vivarium space, ranging in size from 5,000 ASF 

to 120,000 ASF. All of our animal research facilities have 

been designed in accordance with AAALAC and NIH/ 

CDC planning guidelines to meet and exceed local, 

State, Federal and international standards. We have a 

broad range of experience with barrier, containment 

space, specialty cores and investigator access. Some 

of the most recent innovations in animal facility design 

include techniques to control operating and per diem 

costs; protocols to maintain expandable/contractible 

barriers; integration of vented racks with building 

mechanical systems and partial interstitial (catwalks). 

Based on our experience JCI has developed several 

innovative solutions in planning/programming of 

animal facilities. As part of the programming process 

JCI develops a complete statement of functional 

and technical design criteria to insure conformance 

with all regulations and recommendations. These 

criteria will encompass all elements of facility design 

including space standards and work flow, materials of 

construction and finishes; environmental performance, 

controls and monitoring; facility sanitation and pest 

control and requirements for commissioning. 

Animal facilities are some of the most complicated and 

expensive space types in the research arena. Our place 

in the industry as a laboratory design consulting firm 

provides us the advantage of working with many of the 

top institutions, architects and engineers in the world, 

giving us a broad base of experience and the knowledge 

that there are numerous ways to solve a problem. Since 

our entire focus is research facilities, we can provide 

cutting edge technology and experience to every project. 

JCI has laboratory programming and design experience 

working at University of Washington including the 

School of Medicine South Lake Union Phase 3.1 

Feasibility Study, South Lake Union Vivarium Peer 

Review, Animal Facility Master Plan, Vista Vivarium 

Feasibility Study for Central Vivarium Remodel & 

Addition, Health Science Precinct Plan (HSPP).


Harvard University 

Biological Research Infrastructure 

Cambridge, MA 

Scope / Date 

72,000 gsf / $45M / 2005 






• Automatic robotic systems 

Species 

• Rodents 

• Primates 

JCI/GPR was retained for the programming and planning of the 

Biological Research Infrastructure (BRI) at Harvard University in 

Cambridge, Massachusetts for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. 

The facility accommodates both current and long-term animal 

needs for the Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology. 

This underground facility includes two levels. Lower Level One 

is designed as a barrier facility for rodents. This level contains 

animal research labs, procedure rooms, a behavior holding room, 

behavior testing rooms and a transgenic facility. The design 

of the transgenic facility includes animal holding rooms, a cryo 

preservation room and a core procedure room. 

Lower Level Two is a non-barrier floor with a quarantine area 

for rodents, animal research labs for non-human primates and 

other species. The quarantine area consists of animal holding 

rooms, procedure rooms, a BSL3 holding room with a dedicated 

procedure room and material staging room. The material staging 

room has a pass through sterilizer connected to soiled cage wash 

room. The non-human primate suite has been designed with 

the following rooms; procedure, surgery or scrub, animal prep 

and research labs. The cage wash facility has been planned with 

an automatic robotic system. Lower level two also contains the 

mechanical room and electrical room serving the Vivarium. 




University of Michigan Medical 

School 

Biomedical Science Research Building 

Ann Arbor, MI 

Scope / Date 

72,000 gsf / $45M / 2005 






Species 

• Rodents 

• Aquatics 

JCI/GPR was retained for the programming and planning 

through construction administration of the laboratory facilities 

in the BSRB at University of Michigan Medical School. The new 

Biomedical Science Research Building (BSRB) addresses the 

important need for interaction between members of the research 

community as well as the interaction between students and 

faculty. 

Most of the basic laboratory planning principals were established 

during earlier master planning and programming phases of 

the project, in which JCI/GPR played a major role. The building 

contains 240 laboratory modules, on four floors, that houses as 

many as four researchers in each module. The linear equipment 

room scheme is the backbone of the laboratory block. The 

labs open onto the linear equipment corridor on one side, and 

specialized procedure rooms open into the other side. Each lab 

module includes an equipment alcove located on the other side of 

an aisle. Typically the labs are grouped in neighborhoods of eight 

modules. Core labs include BSL3 and ABSL3 laboratory suites. 

The procedure rooms are arranged along the atrium wall, which 

allows for windows in each room to bring in daylight. Five bridges 

connect the lab blocks to the office ribbon through a skylit atrium 

at each of the four laboratory levels. 

The lower two levels of the building house the multi-level (68,000 

NSF) animal facility with BSL3/ABSL3 contianment, aquatics 

and an imaging facility including 2 MRI’s (7T and 9.4T), and a 600 

NMR. The vivarium is partially shelled on both floors. A demising 

wall separates the shell space in order to minimize noise and 

vibration due to future construction.


University of California, San 

Francisco 

Smith Cardiovascular Research Building 

San Francisco, CA 

Scope / Date 

232,000 gsf / $184M / 2010 






Species 

• Rodents 

• Primates 

JCI/GPR was retained for the programming and planning of the 

Biological Research Infrastructure (BRI) at Harvard University in 

Cambridge, Massachusetts for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. 

The facility accommodates both current and long-term animal 

needs for the Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology. 

This underground facility includes two levels. Lower Level One 

is designed as a barrier facility for rodents. This level contains 

animal research labs, procedure rooms, a behavior holding room, 

behavior testing rooms and a transgenic facility. The design 

of the transgenic facility includes animal holding rooms, a cryo 

preservation room and a core procedure room. 

Lower Level Two is a non-barrier floor with a quarantine area 

for rodents, animal research labs for non-human primates and 

other species. The quarantine area consists of animal holding 

rooms, procedure rooms, a BSL3 holding room with a dedicated 

procedure room and material staging room. The material staging 

room has a pass through sterilizer connected to soiled cage wash 

room. The non-human primate suite has been designed with 

the following rooms; procedure, surgery or scrub, animal prep 

and research labs. The cage wash facility has been planned with 

an automatic robotic system. Lower level two also contains the 

mechanical room and electrical room serving the Vivarium. 




University of California, San 

Francisco 

Parnassus Services Seismic Replacement Building 

San Francisco, CA 

Scope / Date 

84,600 gsf / $40M / 2004 






Species 

• Primates 

The functional and space program for Parnassus Services 

Seismic Replacement Building has been based upon an 

assignable area target of 45,084 ASF with a target of 84,600 GSF 

(53% building efficiency). The building houses animal research 

laboratories (ABSL3) with non-human primates, procedure 

rooms and other specialty laboratories in five floors above 

grade, exclusive of a mechanical penthouse. A partial basement 

was provided for building mechanical and electrical and tunnel 

access. 

A major objective of UCSF Parnassus Services Seismic 

Replacement Building was to be as flexible as possible in order to 

accommodate the changing needs the researchers over the life 

of the building. One of the key elements in the programming and 

planning effort has been UCSF’s clear direction that Parnassus 

Services Building was developed around the concept of 

prototypical animal research spaces with flexible support spaces. 

The laboratories accommodate almost any research, while the 

support space can be easily tailored to the needs of individual 

researchers or disciplines.


U.S. Department of Agriculture 

National Center for Animal Health Phase II Lab 

(Consolidated Laboratory Facility) 

Ames, IA 

Scope / Date 

513,000 gsf / $143.4M / 2008 






Species 

• Rodents 

• Rabbits 

• Cats 

• Dogs 

• Poulltry 

• Aquatics 

The National Center for Animal Health Phase II Lab in Ames, 

Iowa consists of new space that will host three key USDA 

agencies: the National Veterinary Services Laboratories, the 

Center of Veterinary Biologics, and the National Animal Disease 

Center. 

The facility will include laboratories and support space for 

domestic diseases of livestock, birds and poultry; veterinary 

biologics and the development of standards and procedures 

for product release; and animal specimens for domestic and 

foreign animal disease investigation and the production of 

reagents. Laboratory work will be done at two biological safety 

levels: BSL-2 and enhanced BSL-3. 

A caged animal facility will be included to support all three 

agencies. It will house various species including mice, rats, 

guinea pigs, mink, rabbits, cats, dogs, and poultry. An 

aquaculture unit, including a bio-containment suite, will be 

used to hold fish for testing and anti-serum production. 

The laboratory concept developed by JCI/GPR will maximize 

net to gross floor plate efficiency, create a more compact 

building envelope for energy efficiency, and place offices/ 

workstations as close to lab benches as possible, since the 

connection between the workstation and the lab bench is 

critical. More importantly, the development of the lab diagram 

is directly tied to the idea of flexibility with a rigorous system 

of planning modules and a casework system with few fixed 

elements. 

The facilities will be designed to incorporate sustainability 

techniques using the LEED TM rating system as a guideline. 



a) Describe your firm’s expertise and recent experience 

in the innovative design of large, flexible, multi-species, 

animal care and research facilities, compliant with 

AAALAC and NIH guidelines. 

b. Demonstrate your firm’s knowledge relating to 

current trends in designing for operational efficiency 

in these types of facilities. Describe your firm’s 

experience in applying LEAN processes, or similar 

quality improvement programs, to improve work flow 

and facility operations. 

c. Describe your firm’s experience in implementing 

automation or other new technology to improve 

flexibility, operational efficiency and facility operations 

and maintenance. 

Ballinger has built a reputation of excellence for the 

design of large, complex research buildings, often 

inclusive of support facilities such as vivariums that are 

instrumental to a robust research program. Projects 

of this type require an acute understanding of the 

connectivity to the larger research initiative as well as 

a keen understanding of the scientific community and 

how to create a place that stimulates discovery. The 

projects profiled in this submission represent both 

public and private institutions who have implemented 

some of the most forward-thinking approaches to 

interdisciplinary, collaborative research environments. 

AAALAC and NIH Guidelines 

In all of the listed relevant project examples, Ballinger 

has successfully navigated AAALAC, NIH and various 

agency guidelines, codes, and regulations. Many 

projects within Ballinger’s more extensive research 

portfolio are a direct result of NIH funding, either 

through grants for renovations/shelled floor fit-outs, 

or for the research itself conducted within the building. 

Ballinger has assisted many universities in preparing 

NIH, NSF, and NASA grant proposals for research 

facility upgrades. 

Ballinger’s Management Principal Jeff French has 

personally served as a grant review panelist for NIH and 

NSF, and co-authored the NSF guidebook on academic 

research facility planning. He has reviewed AAALAC 

accreditation visit reports and summarized facility 

recommendations in response. 

Flexibility 

Virtually all of Ballinger’s recent experiences are 

characterized by some dimension of flexibility. At 

Cornell’s East Campus Research Facility, the holding 

Colket Translational Research Building, Children’s Hopsital of 

Philadelphia (Ballinger) 

room planning module was developed to enable 

inclusion or omission of ante rooms, varying rack 

layouts and rack per room densities, varying species, 

suite concepts for isolation of multiple rooms from the 

remainder of the animal population, and an innovative 

mechanical system concept which places what would 

otherwise have been a vertical interstitial floor for 

maintenance access “on its side”, stacked horizontally 

rather than between floors, reducing overall building 

height and cost yet providing comparable service 

accessibility without penetrating the animal care 

environment. 

Applying Lean Processes 

At the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Veterinary 

Medicine, Ballinger eliminated the older, traditional 

clean and soiled corridor concept by instituting timeof-day 

cleaning protocols (e.g. clean in morning, soiled 

in evening, with corridor cleaning in between) to enable 

utilization of the same corridor for access to both cage 

wash facilities as well as “suites,” saving a tremendous 

amount of duplicate circulation and maximizing 

building efficiency. 

Such plan and circulation concepts minimize square 

footage and increase net assignable area over 

historical benchmarks. By categorizing animal care 

facilities—for example, addressing housing (species, 

racks per room, cage types, holding to procedure 

room ratios, primate socialization/psychological wellbeing, 

etc.), then containment goals (BSL-3, conflicts 

between animal care staff and PI’s for cage changing 

vs. research work in the room, quarantine, ventilated 

cages/racks), then support program (surgery, cage 

wash, feed and bedding, clean cage storage, misting, 

etc.), then operational issues (personnel/staffing levels,

Vernon + Shirley Hill Pavilion, School of Veterinary Medicine, University 

of Pennsylvania (Ballinger) 

facility management and maintenance access, waste 

handling)—Ballinger can address efficiencies in each 

category. 

At The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, the layout of 

the vivarium was derived from the goal of maximizing 

housing capacity while minimizing operational 

redundancies and cross-contamination. A strict oneway 

directional protocol was developed to limit excess 

cleaning. The organization of all of the cage wash, 

feed, bedding, and personnel spaces were located at 

the service and external access end of the building. All 

building system services, including valves, controls, 

panels, etc., were located outside the boundary of the 

vivarium, limiting the need for any non-animal care or 

non-research personnel to enter the vivarium itself. 

Additionally, Ballinger arranged the vertical circulation 

into the research floors above so as to control access 

to the critical vivarium areas. This level of control and 

security allowed principal investigators to access the 

procedure spaces without interfering with the day-today 

operation of the facility by animal care staff. 

Integrated Project Delivery 

Ballinger successfully completed its first project using 

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)—exemplary of the 

latest thinking in lean delivery—for the University of 

Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery 

opened in January 2011 with much acclaim and 

considerable savings. This project realized value via: 

• Relatedness: Recognize and work to increase the 

relatedness of members of the project team. Build 

interdisciplinary teams to solve both design and 

construction problems. Use the “Big Room” Design 

Workshop strategy throughout the project. 


East Campus Research Facility, Cornell University (Ballinger) 

• Collaboration: Collaborate throughout Project 

Formation, Systems Development, Project 

Procurement, and Project Delivery Phases with 

all members of the team recognizing that the 

leadership of the Owner, Architect, and CM/GC is 

project wide and not based solely on the magnitude 

of effort at any single point on the project timeline. 

• Network of Commitments: Plan and manage the 

project as a network of commitments. Quality 

must be controlled at the source where the work 

is being performed and by those performing the 

work. Therefore, develop project specific support 

systems for team members. 

• Building Information Modeling (BIM): By using 

Revit Building by Autodesk, and other software, the 

project team developed the physical components 

of the Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery design 

as an association of elements with inherent 

parameters that maintain a dynamic internal 

relationship within a common data base. During 

the full life cycle of the design process, information 

about the Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery could 

be extracted from the dynamic data base and used 

to serve the interests of the University, Architect, 

CM/GC, and future users. 

• Reliable Promising: Each project team member 

agrees to help develop the reliability of work flow 

across the entire project timeline by having the 

willingness and ability to make and keep reliable 

promises. 

• Planning and Scheduling: Project scheduling must 

be based on the principle of “Pull Scheduling.” 

End of work stream outcomes are identified and


Colket Translational Research Building, Children’s Hopsital of 

Philadelphia (Ballinger) 

then work is extracted (pulled back) to the current 

condition. The developed work stream must be 

connected and have a clear way to request action 

and receive a response (Should, Can, Will, Did). The 

schedule must be based on collaborative planning 

by all project team members who will perform in 

a phase. Team focus is on making things happen 

rather than monitoring. 

• Minimize Waste: Learn to recognize and eliminate 

waste throughout the life of the project. Design 

Assist participation at the subcontractor level aids 

in avoiding unnecessary steps caused by designing 

around one vendor or equipment item and ending 

up with another. For example, a vivarium rack 

washer manufactured by Girton may have a 

different pit dimension than one from Steris. If that 

pit is designed around Girton, and the Steris unit 

is ultimately purchased, the pit must redesigned 

and documented, affecting concrete, rebar, and 

possibly even architectural dimensions and 

mechanical/electrical engineering. That is waste 

for which no value is achieved and is inconsistent 

with a lean delivery mode. 

• Dynamic Cost Modeling / Target Value Process: 

The maximum price of the project together with 

any contingencies is identified in the project 

budget. Initially, the project cost model will be 

developed using a combination of historical project 

data, current industry cost information, and 

systems based cost data. Through the sharing of 

evolving information, the collaborative expertise 

of the team, and supported by BIM tools, the 

model is used and updated in real time during the 

Project Formation, Systems Development, Project 

Procurement, and Project Delivery phases. Budget 

East Campus Research Facility, Cornell University (Ballinger) 

milestones are confirmation points that the design 

is in compliance with the maximum price of the 

project and not stopping points in the process of 

pricing. On the University of Wisconsin project, 

the Owner, Architect, and CM/GC staffed target 

cost teams were charged with delivering set based 

design solutions to systems, components and 

sub-components within the target costs of those 

elements of the project. 

Automation 

For this CHOP project, as well as for Cornell University, 

the Wistar Institute, and Temple University, Ballinger 

evaluated varying degrees of automation, including 

robotic/automated cage wash systems. In each case, 

the throughput efficiency gains did not offset other 

challenges, including cost premiums and flexibility 

compromises, so such robotic equipment was not 

utilized. It is unlikely Ballinger would deploy them 

in a large primate facility; if the rodent population is 

extensive and the tunnel washer demand substantial, 

such an installation may emerge as feasible, but one 

must evaluate the cost premium of the equipment vs. 

the offsetting staff headcount reduction, and that will 

generally be a function of a very high cages per day 

volume. 

Ballinger has implemented supply side pneumatic/ 

automated feed distribution and Garb-el disposal 

systems designed to reduce staffing requirements and 

improve operational efficiency.

ARCHITECT - ENGINEER QUALIFICATIONS 

2a. FIRM (OR BRANCH OFFICE) NAME 

LMN 

2b. STREET 


2c. CITY 

Seattle 

6a. POINT OF CONTACT NAME AND TITLE 


1. SOLICITATION NUMBER (If any) 

203928 

PART II - GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS 

(If a firm has branch offices, complete for each specific branch office seeking work.) 

2d. STATE 

WA 

3. YEAR ESTABLISHED 

1979 

a. TYPE 

2e. ZIP CODE 

Partnership 

98104 b. SMALL BUSINESS STATUS 

N/A 

5. OWNERSHIP 

4. DUNS NUMBER 

14-807-7290 

George Shaw, AIA, LEED AP, Partner c. NAME OF FIRM (If block 2a is a branch office) 

6b. TELEPHONE NUMBER 

206.682.3460 

6c. E-MAIL ADDRESS 

gshaw@lmnarchitects.com 

8A.FORMER FIRM NAME(S) (If any) 8b. YR. ESTABLISHED 8c. DUNS NUMBER 

loschky, marquardt & nesholm 1979 14-807-7290 

a. Function 

Code 

9. EMPLOYEES BY DISCIPLINE 

b. Discipline 

c. No. of Employees a. Profile 

(1) FIRM (2) BRANCH Code 

N/A 

10. PROFILE OF FIRM’S EXPERIENCE AND ANNUAL 

AVERAGE REVENUE FOR LAST 5 YEARS 

b. Experience 

02 Administrative 10 A11 Auditoriums and Theaters 6 

06 Architect 79 B02 Bridges 3 

37 Interior Designer 4 C10 Commercial Buildings (low rise) 6 

47 Planner: URban/Regional 3 E02 Educational Facilities: Classrooms 7 

Other Employees 4 

11. ANNUAL AVERAGE PROFESSIONAL 

SERVICES REVENUES OF FIRM FOR LAST 

3 YEARS (Insert revenue index number 

shown at right) 

a. Federal Work 2 

b. Non-Federal Work 9 

c. Total Work 9 

Total 100 

1. Less than $100,000 

2. $100,000 to less than $250,000 

3. $250,000 to less than $500,000 

4. $500,000 to less than $1 million 

5. $1 million to less than $2 million 

F02 Field Houses; Gyms; Stadiums 5 

G01 Garages: Parking Decks 5 

I05 Interior Design; Space Planning 4 

L04 Libraries; Museums; Galleries 3 

P05 Planning 3 

R08 Research Facilities 4 

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REVENUE INDEX NUMBER 

12. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 

The foregoing is a statement of facts. 





10. $50 million or greater 

a. SIGNATURE b. DATE 

July 12, 2012 

c. NAME AND TITLE 

George Shaw, AIA, LEED AP, Partner 

c. Revenue 

Index Number 

(see below) 

STANDARD FORM 330 (1/2004) PAGE 6


1. SOLICITATION OR PROJECT NUMBER 

203928 

ARCHITECT – ENGINEER QUALIFICATIONS 

PART 2 – GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS 

(If a firm has branch offices, complete for each specific branch office seeking work) 

2A. FIRM NAME 2B. FIRM STREET 

Ballinger 833 Chestnut Street, Suite 1400 

2C. FIRM CITY 2D. FIRM STATE 2E. FIRM ZIP CODE 

Philadelphia PA 19107 

3. YEAR ESTABLISHED 4. DUNS NUMBER 

1878 002319879 

5A. OWNERSHIP - TYPE 5B. OWNERSHIP - SMALL BUSINESS STATUS 

Corporation 

6A. POINT OF CONTACT NAME AND TITLE 

Terry Steelman, FAIA, LEED AP, Principal 

6B. TELEPHONE NUMBER 6C. E-MAIL ADDRESS 

215.446.0800 tsteelman@ballinger-ae.com 

7. NAME OF FIRM (IF BLOCK 2A. IS A BRANCH OFFICE) 

8. FORMER FIRM NAME(S) (IF ANY) 8B. YEAR ESTABLISHED 8C. DUNS NUMBER 

The Ballinger Company 1920 002319879 

Ballinger & Perrot 1900 

Hales & Ballinger 1894 

Geissinger & Hales 1878 

9. EMPLOYEES BY DISCIPLINE 

10. PROFILE OF FIRM'S EXPERIENCE AND ANNUAL AVERAGE REVENUE FOR 

THE LAST 5 YEARS 

a. Function Code b. Discipline 

c. No. of Employees 

(1) Firm (2) Branch 

a. Profile Code b. Experience 

c. Revenue Index 

Number 

02 Administrative 22 A08 Animal Facilities 7 

06 Architect 131 E02 Educational Facilities 7 

21 Electrical Engineer 28 H05 Health Systems Planning 6 

25 Fire Protection Engineer 11 H09 Hospital & Medical Facilities 8 

31 Health Facility Planner 2 I05 Interior Design & Space Planning 5 

37 Interior Designer 17 L01 Laboratories; Medical Research Facilities 7 

42 Mechanical Engineer 36 O01 Office Buildings; Industrial Parks 6 

57 Structural Engineer 9 R08 Research Facilities 8 

S11 Sustainable Design 8 

Total 256 

11. ANNUAL AVERAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REVENUES OF 

FIRMS FOR LAST 3 YEARS 

(Insert revenue index number shown at right) 

a. Federal Work 5 

b. Non-Federal Work 9 

c. Total Work 9 

12. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 

The foregoing is a statement of facts. 

a. Signature b. Date 

c. Name and Title 

Terry Steelman, FAIA, LEED AP, Principal 

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REVENUE INDEX NUMBER 

1. Less than $100,000 6. $2 million to less than $5 million 

2. $100,000 to less than $250,000 7. $5 million to less than $10 million 

3. $250,000 to less than $500,000 8. $10 million to less than $25 million 

4. $500,000 to less than $1 million 9. $25 million to less than $50 million 

5. $1 million to less than $2 million 10. $50 million or greater 

July 3, 2012


28 | LMN + BALLINGER

3 

Ability to 

Manage 

Schedule & 

Budget 



Ability to Manage 

Schedule and 

Budget 

The LMN/Ballinger team has very significant 

experience in delivering projects within established 

schedules and budgets. We understand that a project 

cannot succeed if it does not meet these two essential 

parameters. The examples in the following table, which 

are all animal research and care facilities designed 

by Ballinger, illustrate our team’s ability to effectively 

manage schedule and budget on comparable projects 

(all delivered on time): 

Project Name Budget Final Cost 

The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia 





Ithaca, NY 


Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery 

Madison, WI 


New Research Tower 




Cincinnati, OH 

$240M $240M 

$60.5M 

$150M 

$40M 

(scope reduction) 


Facing Page: PACCAR Hall, University of Washington (LMN) 

$165M 

(scope increase) 

$65M $65M 

Design Duration & 

Completion* 

15 months 

August 2009 

22 months 

September 2008 

31 months 

December 2010 

26 months 

January 2014 

$32M $32M 1993 

* All projects delivered on time.


Project Schedule 

Along with Scope of Work and Program development, 

confirmation of the project schedule will be an early 

priority. Working with the Capital Projects Office and the 

client group, the LMN/Ballinger team’s initial actions 

will be to confirm the milestone dates and embellish 

each phase with the appropriate tasks and review and 

approval dates. Clear communication of the project 

schedule is very important in gathering both consensus 

and commitment from each team member. Once we 

have a confirmed schedule, it will be distributed to the 

entire team along with other key project information 

(budget, scope, program, etc.), and will be continually 

reviewed and updated throughout the project as a 

systematic part of the management process. Schedule 

review will include the evaluation of progress on the 

tasks and additional resources will be brought to bear as 

required to maintain the agreed upon schedule. 

Project Budget 

It is no secret that the later in the process critical 

decisions are made, the more they cost to 

implement. So it is essential to address the building’s 

programmatic and systems criteria early, engage 

user participation early, and understand the cost 

implications of decisions early. A comprehensive 

cost model for the components of the project will be 

developed early in the design process. This cost model 

will be tested in conjunction with concept design 

alternatives to determine the design scheme that 

delivers the best value. This step is critical because 

it establishes both the basic design concept and the 

budget parameters that must endure over the course 

of the entire project. 

In order to ensure accurate estimating, a great deal 

of attention is given to organizing design information 

in a manner that is comprehensive in terms of overall 

scope, yet appropriate in level of detail for the given 

phase. To ensure that the entire design team thoroughly 

understands and is committed to the budget parameters, 

we make sure that all engineering/building systems are 

fully integrated into the cost model. All consultants are 

given responsibility to develop their respective systems/ 

building components within this budget framework and 

regularly scheduled interdisciplinary meetings are used 

to monitor and coordinate the progress of the work. 

Once we have established a cost model, we can identify 

upgrade and downgrade options against a baseline 

set of criteria believed to reflect an appropriate level of 

quality across all building elements. If client priorities 

suggest an upgrade to a particular material or system, 

a corresponding downgrade - with an offsetting cost 

reduction - may be necessary to maintain budget 

feasibility. This dynamic approach enables the cost 

model to be a working, evolving tool. 

In a GCCM method of project delivery, the selected 

contractor’s cost and constructability expertise is 

completely integrated into our design team effort. 

To gain the optimum value from the GCCM and 

further ensure the accuracy of cost estimates and 

the reliability of project budgets, we establish a 

consistent cost estimate format to be used by our 

cost consultant and the contractor at the outset. Once 

estimates are prepared, we perform careful “side-byside” 

reviews to make sure that quantity take-offs are 

accurately reconciled between estimators. As a part 

of our process, we review the detail of the estimates 

to ascertain that the design is accurately reflected. 

It has been our experience that once quantities are 

reconciled to actual design requirements, the unit cost 

differences between estimators can be resolved in an 

expedient manner.

4 

Programming 

and Concept 

Development 

Experience 



Programming 

and Concept 

Development 

Experience 

The early programming and planning phase for 

a vivarium facility, whether for a public or private 

institutions, is the critical one for establishing goals, 

aspirations, program focus, space agenda and 

relationships, and ultimately, costs. A successful 

outcome will hinge on the design team’s ability to 

engage, with all stakeholders, in a dialogue about the 

choices available. We advocate a process that includes 

a series of on-site workshops, designed to address the 

following issues with groups ranging from facilities, to 

administration, to research scientists, to animal care 

staff, to maintenance personnel: 

• Program for animal housing, procedure, support, 

receiving, material / personnel flows, etc. 

• Technologies associated with animal environments 

and research 

• Concept options and feasibility 

• Costs of the various design strategies 

Parameters Affecting Program 

Ballinger generally thinks about issues surrounding 

development of a vivarium facility such as the University 

of Washington Animal Research and Care Facility in four 

categories: species/population, housing/environment, 

support functions, and operations. Furthering our 

understanding in each category will enable the design 

team to advance multiple options, ultimately prioritizing 

critical elements and goals, and selecting the preferred 

strategy. Planning it for future convertibility requires 

scrutiny of the following issues: 

1. Species / Population: 


Facing Page: Vernon + Shirley Hill Pavilion, School of Veterinary 

Medicine, University of Pennsylvania (Ballinger) 

• Types of animals / mix of species: mice, rats, 

rabbits, dogs, primates, etc. 

• Animal census: 5 - 10 year projection 

• Duration of typical studies: acute / long-term 

• Immunocompromised / transgenics / breeding 

2. Housing / Environment: 

• Type of holding / cages: number of animals per 

cage, static vs. microisolator / vented racks, 

racks per room 

• Containment vs. barrier vs. conventional 

requirements, bio-safety levels 

• Breeding requirements, if any 

• Separation of species: primates and dogs from 

mice 

• Primate enrichment, isolation, human safety 

3. Support Functions: 

• Procedure rooms / suites; flexibility to convert to 

holding 

• Changing system / bio-safety cabinets 

• O.R.’s, necropsy, quarantine, cage wash, 

feed storage, bedding storage, re-derivation, 

receiving, staff offices, conference, training, etc. 

• Interaction of animal care staff with researchers 

• Break areas, food service


Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery, University of Wisconsin (Ballinger) Virology lab at Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery, University of 

Wisconsin (Ballinger) 

4. Operations: 

• Vertical transport issues, particularly acute with 

elevated laboratories and mix of transgenic and 

non-transgenic species 

• Security: access / egress control and intrusion 

prevention 

• Robotics / automation: cage wash, bedding, 

watering, feeding 

• Adjacencies / relationship to laboratories and 

other facilities / duplication avoidance 

Once we have gathered input on all of the above categories, 

we will focus on the fundamental building block of the 

plan, the housing and procedure module. As the preferred 

module is being determined, circulation protocols must 

also be established, as the building’s efficiency (net-togross) 

is tremendously impacted by this, particularly 

if conventional and transgenic animals are colocated, 

multiple species are housed, and vertical transport is 

required. Finally, mechanical / electrical systems criteria 

must be developed, as these will greatly influence costs. 

Case Study 

University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Institutes for 

Discovery 

Part of the intensive programming phase for the new 

330,000 sf Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery included 

an assembly of four workgroups made up of users, 

administration and facilities representatives to guide 

the program development for the component pieces 

of the building design. One such workgroup focused 

on Research Collaboration in the Knowledge Era, 

exploring how research is evolving and the trends which 

may influence facility planning. Recognizing that the 

initiative needed to encompass both public and private 

dimensions, the primary physical planning criteria 

included: 

• Interdisciplinarity: Co-location of a broad range of 

disciplines, from biological sciences to engineering 

and computer science to the humanities. 

• Collaboration: Encouraging more than the mere 

coexistence of these disciplines in the building, but 

rather their working together in new ways. 

• Interaction: Central to successful collaborative, 

interdisciplinary research is the fostering of 

interaction between individuals, teams, and the 

broader community. 

• Changeability: By its very mission, this building will 

likely experience a high rate of churn and must be 

able to respond to wide-ranging and time-sensitive 

change. 

• Efficiency: Maximizing value for dollar spent amid 

a fixed cost target.

Town Center atrium at the Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery 

The Research Collaboration workgroup utilized 

the workshop process to examine an appropriate 

preliminary balance of program elements and to 

explore the ideal aggregation of space to support the 

overall project goals. Particular attention was given 

to fostering the interaction so essential to successful 

collaborative science. A number of important ideas 

emerged: 

• Clustering / Research Neighborhoods 

• Localized Commons 

• Interaction Catalysts 

• Computational Hubs 

• Research Teaching Labs 

Finally, potential core facilities were considered and 

evaluated in terms of their relevance to the institution’s 

mission, geographic proximity and accessibility 

elsewhere on campus, and cost. Ultimately, it was 

recommended that two core facilities should be 

included: a vivarium for small animal studies and a 

computational core. 

The 27,000 sf vivarium facility is housed entirely below 

grade to the east of the main Wisconsin Institutes 

for Discovery building in the Auxiliary Service Facility 

and is linked to the main building via an underground 

tunnel. With direct access to the loading dock above, 

the detachment of the vivarium from the main building 

enables long-term expansion opportunities. 

As a future phase research facility is contemplated on 

the site east of the Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery, 

the vivarium can be extended beyond its current 

footprint with increased animal housing capacity to 


Presentation room at the Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery. 

commensurate with the scale and mission of the future 

phase. Support functions were carefully planned to 

anticipate such an expansion, including an interstitial 

mechanical floor affording easy access to systems and 

equipment without disruption to ongoing operations. 

Small animal species ranging from rodents to zebra fish 

are accommodated, and procedure space is embedded 

within the vivarium to minimize transport to and from 

the main building. 

Global Health Initiative Incubator Series held at the Wisconsin 

Institutes of Discovery.


6 

Project 

Management 

Approach 


Facing Page: Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science & 

Engineering, University of Washington (LMN)


Project 

Management 

Approach 

Describe your firm’s Project Management approach 

related to design and project administration and its 

relevance to this particular project. 

The LMN-Ballinger team is configured to provide 

optimal expertise in all aspects of the UW Animal 

Research and Care Facility. LMN will provide overall 

project management throughout all phases of the 

project, coordinate the exterior site and building 

development, and serve as the architect of record. 

Ballinger will provide leadership of the vivarium 

programming and design. Josh Meyer of Jacobs 

Consultancy will provide specialty consulting in the 

programming and planning of the vivarium and in 

vivarium equipment selection. 

LMN believes that the comprehensive integration 

of design, management, and technical execution is 

essential to our projects. For a project to be successful, 

it requires more than just great design. The UW Animal 

Research and Care Facility project will be properly 

managed to insure that it remains on schedule and 

budget and that the right people are involved in 

decision making at the appropriate times. And it 

will receive excellent technical execution, with wellconceived 

details that serve the complex functions 

while creating a building that will endure. 

At LMN, the project manager is responsible for 

maintaining day-to-day control over the design team’s 

effort while overseeing work scheduling, budget/cost 

control, production management, project meetings, 

and daily client interaction. The PM is responsible for 

identifying the client’s expectations, determining the 

project scope, and preparing contracts. The PM also 

conducts project meetings and distributes project data 


Facing Page: Seattle Central Library (LMN in joint venture with OMA) 

to team members. The PM is responsible for ensuring 

that contractual obligations are met and for carrying 

out the project within the established scope, schedule, 

and budget. 

LMN’s proposed project manager for the Animal 

Research and Care Facility, Dean Clark, has had the 

same role for many higher education projects including 

several UW projects as well as the WSU Biotechnology/ 

Life Sciences Facility, which includes a 10,000 squarefoot 

vivarium. Dean will bring his excellent management 

skills and knowledge of UW processes to this project. 

Include experience working in an integrated team 

environment with the owner, and GC/CM team, 

including shared use of building information models. 

Describe your firm’s experience and approach working 

on a project with these attributes. 

Integrated Team Environment, GCCM and Building 

Information Modeling 

LMN has a long history of working to integrate the 

client, design and construction teams together to 

facilitate better communication and foster trust 

throughout the team. We embrace the concept of an 

integrated design process in our normal working mode. 

We were involved with the first GCCM application on 

a higher education project in the State of Washington 

– UW Tacoma Phase I – and subsequently have been 

continuously active on GCCM projects at colleges and 

universities throughout the state. Our GCCM recent 

experience at the UW includes phases 1 and 2 of the 

Foster School of Business and the Allen Center for 

Computer Science and Engineering, along with the 

University Sound Transit Station.


Our extensive use of Building Information Modeling 

(BIM) on projects over the past eight years is an 

enabling technology – it allows the design and 

construction teams to achieve a new level of 

coordination and communication. We sees integrated 

design technology as a powerful tool for enhancing 

the creative process, communicating with clients and 

developing better, more environmentally responsive 

buildings. Building Information Modeling (BIM) 

utilizes detailed 3D computer modeling to optimize 

design and documentation, enhance coordination and 

quality control, and simplify the construction process. 

The Animal Research and Care Facility will benefit 

greatly from BIM, through the rigorous coordination 

of programmatic elements, complex systems, and 

adjacent existing conditions by both the design team 

and the GC/CM. 

On the Foster School of Business project at the 

University of Washington, LMN employed BIM modeling 

from early schematic design through completion 

of construction documents, engaging structural 

and MEP engineering consultants for modeling 

of building systems. We also shared our model 

with the GCCM, Sellen Construction, who further 

developed it in conjunction with the subcontractor 

team for preparation of shop drawings, coordination 

between trades, material fabrication, field layout and 

dimensional verification. During the design phases, 

the BIM models allowed for very efficient analysis 

of alternative design solutions and preparation of 

visual simulations to support client presentations and 

fundraising efforts. During the construction phase, the 

integrated modeling process resulted in on-time, high 

quality workmanship, and substantial reduction in field 

generated conflicts and RFI’s. 

Include experience working in an integrated team 

environment with the owner, and GC/CM team, 

including shared use of building information models. 

Describe your firm’s experience and approach working 

on a project with these attributes. 

Managing Subconsultants 

Engineering, landscape design, cost estimating 

and specialty consulting will be performed by our 

subconsultants. LMN and Ballinger have extensive 

experience working with the subconsultants required 

on a vivarium project. Virtually every laboratory and 

vivarium project in our portfolio of projects has utilized 

a similar approach with subconsultants. We select 

firms who are good collaborators and who have project- 

specific experience in their discipline in order to form 

the most effective team possible on a given project. 

Coordination of the design effort and the work 

products of all disciplines is a responsibility of the 

project manager. We employ several specific strategies 

to ensure that consultant coordination occurs. Our 

design approach brings consulting disciplines into 

collaboration through (1) communicating a clear 

design schedule with mid-phase checkpoints; (2) 

frequent sharing of drawings, featuring regular posting 

of current design drawings using Newforma Project 

Center; (3) regularly scheduled consultant coordination 

meetings; and (4) verification of coordination through 

our quality control process. 

During the programming and concept phase, we will 

selectively rely on subconsultants to assess important 

aspects of the project. Our lab planning consultant will 

focus on program development and our engineering 

subconsultants will help us determine the impacts 

of such issues as the high water table and the future 

presence of a Phase 3 tower over the vivarium. As 

a concept design is developed, building systems 

subconsultants will supply preliminary systems 

assumptions and alternatives for consideration and 

early pricing. 

During the Schematic Design phase, we typically 

use consultant meetings to brainstorm alternative 

approaches to building systems, especially structural 

and mechanical elements, which usually have the 

greatest effect on the building architecture. We typically 

try to schedule consultant coordination meetings 

approximately every other week on days adjacent to 

owner review meetings in order to identify and bring 

issues forward for resolution. 

During the Design Development phase, our consultant 

coordination meetings often increase in frequency. 

This phase is critical for consultant coordination, since 

during this time the building concept is developed 

into a constructible entity, with full recognition of the 

detailed requirements of each space and the technical 

requirements of each building system that serves those 

spaces. Near the end of Design Development we apply 

our quality control process to help assure that critical 

issues are resolved. 

During the Construction Documents phase, consultant 

coordination meetings continue at a frequent pace. 

Some of these meetings will be specifically focused 

on individual building systems, in order to ascertain 

that detailed requirements of the owner and of 

codes are being fulfilled by the design. Such systems

as telecommunications, data, fire protection, and 

HVAC controls benefit from these focused meetings, 

especially if the owner and GCCM can be represented. 

The completion of Construction Documents includes 

our most significant quality control review, featuring 

LMN’s interdisciplinary review as well as quality 

control by consultants, in accordance with LMN’s more 

detailed CD checklists. 

Demonstrate your firm’s experience and ability to 

develop a communications plan that will facilitate 

interaction and communication between multiple, 

diverse, UW entities, interested community and 

neighborhood groups, and local and remote elements 

of the design team and regulatory review agencies. 

Communications Plan 

A critical component of successful project delivery 

is the ability to transparently communicate the 

full range of project issues and alternative design 

solutions to stakeholders and interested parties. It is 

this transparency which paves the way for consensus 

building and eventual project implementation. The 

LMN team has noteworthy experience responding 

to community needs, comments, and interaction on 

large, complex projects. Each project has included 

numerous design presentations to community 

organizations including community boards, citizens 

advisory committees, department of neighborhoods, 

public art programs, design commissions, and other 

interest and stakeholder groups. The LMN reputation 

of establishing client/community consensus gives 

testament to the comprehensiveness, transparency, 

and professionalism in the delivery of planning and 

architecture services. 

Our communications plan includes: 

• Commitment to an Open Design Process - 

Mutual respect and teamwork between planners, 

architects, consultants, contractors and the client 

are the foundation of our approach. 

• Active Listening by the Design Team – We seek 

to hear and understand the needs, goals and 

underlying aspirations of our clients. 

• Establishment of Effective Communication 

Channels – Determining the primary points of 

contact and a clear network of communications 

is fundamental. We expect project managers for 

LMN and the UW to be the primary nodes in that 

network. 


• Setting a Clear Schedule – With input from the 

UW and subconsultants, we will devise a schedule 

that has clear and achievable milestones, and then 

work to establish buy-in for that schedule. We 

believe that a clear schedule is a prerequisite to an 

integrated team effort. 

• Strategically Timed Meetings – Scheduling 

meetings at key decision-making points helps to 

keep the process on track. 

• Interactive Workshops - We use workshops and 

design charrettes extensively in the planning, 

programming, and design phases of all our projects 

where we encourage the active participation of 

stakeholders and interested parties. This method 

of collaboration identifies issues and builds 

consensus toward final decisions. 

• Presentations Suited to the Purpose - We bring 

the knowledge to determine when a presentation 

should be formal or informal, depending on the 

mix of participants and the purpose of the session. 

The style of the presentation and media utilized 

is essential to capture the audience and promote 

effective communication. 

• Documentation of Decisions – Prompt meeting 

notes and confirming memos are utilized to verify 

project decisions. 

• Web-Based Document Exchange - LMN relies 

on Newforma Info Exchange to facilitate the bidirectional 

transfer of large files, a secure, easy 

to use web interface that can make other types 

of project data including email, tasks, schedules, 

drawings, RFIs, and submittals available to team 

members. 

• Project Web Site – At the University’s discretion, we 

would host a project web site utilizing Basecamp 

or similar to provide a digital site where project 

information is made available to any participant 

that desires access.


7 

Permitting 

& Other 

Regulatory 

Knowledge 


46 | LMN + BALLINGER 46 | LMN

Permitting & 

Other Regulatory 

Knowledge 

Demonstrate knowledge of applicable codes and 

regulations relevant to this project. Demonstrate 

experience with the approval and permit processes of 

the City of Seattle or other city/county government 

agencies and other applicable regulatory agencies 

including AAALAC and NIH. Describe your 

understanding of the administrative review processes 

and requirements of the University of Washington and 

other public agencies. 

With the project’s complex programmatic and 

technical requirements, its confined site, and the need 

to accommodate future adjacent buildings, possession 

of an in-depth understanding of the City’s regulatory 

processes and a comprehensive knowledge of AAALAC 

and NIH requirements will be essential for the design 

team. 

City of Seattle Permitting 

LMN has a significant body of completed work in the 

City of Seattle and we are completely versed in local 

building codes. We understand the unique relationship 

between the City’s Department of Planning and 

Development (DPD) and the University of Washington. 

We know the process for acquiring code interpretations 

and variations during design and are accomplished at 

obtaining permits. We have executed work under the 

current Seattle energy code and understand its special 

requirements and their application to new buildings 

We will leverage our deep understanding of the code, 

our relationships with DPD officials, and an innovative 

approach on the Animal Research and Care Facility. 

An important step in achieving regulatory success 

in the City of Seattle is meeting early in the design 


process with governing agencies, especially 

building and fire officials, the Seattle Department of 

Transportation, and Seattle Public Utilities. We are able 

to facilitate the necessary interaction and coordination 

between different departments, agencies, and 

representatives in order to expeditiously address and 

resolve regulatory issues. 

AAALAC and NIH Requirements 

Ballinger’s knowledge of regulatory agencies, codes, 

and industry standards will inform the design process 

from the very beginning. Ballinger’s strength in this 

area stems from: 

• Extensive experience in designing technologically 

complex facilities for state university systems 

• National design experience in this type of facility, 

for which we must stay current in the latest code/ 

regulatory developments and thinking 

• A rigorous internal code conformance/review 

process 

Through the design and construction phases, Ballinger 

has successfully navigated AAALAC, NIH, and various 

agency guidelines, codes, and regulations. Many 

projects within Ballinger’s extensive research portfolio 

are a direct result of NIH funding, either through grants 

for renovations/shelled floor fitouts, or for the research 

itself conducted within the building. Ballinger has 

assisted many universities in preparing NIH, NSF, and 

NASA grant proposals for research facility upgrades. 

Jeff French has personally served as a grant review 

panelist for NIH and NSF, as well as co-authoring the 

NSF guidebook on academic research facility planning.


He has reviewed AAALAC accreditation visit reports 

and summarized facility recommendations in response. 

In designing a substantive new research facility and 

vivarium, it is not enough for the operating systems 

to conform to the letter of each governing code. The 

design team must also have an understanding of 

the thinking behind not only governing codes, but 

numerous non-binding national standards as well. 

This allows the design team to anticipate trends in 

certain codes and standards, insuring that the facility 

will not be quickly “dated” in its approach to such 

important aspects as fire safety, environmental issues, 

lab safety, indoor air quality, etc. 

The code conformance/review process at Ballinger 

insures a thorough check at each stage of the design 

process to see that the building meets or exceeds 

codes/regulations. This process includes: 

• Thorough, documented code review in all 

disciplines at the beginning of the project. 

• Ongoing updates to the code review as code issues 

are resolved, or negotiated, during the design 

process 

• Final code check of all documents in each discipline 

before they go to bid 

In the course of this process, issues to be negotiated 

with local authorities are flushed out, conformance 

options are explored with the client for cost/benefit 

and all general code/regulatory aspects of the 

design are well thought out, openly examined, and 

documented. 

UW Administrative Processes 

Because of LMN’s substantial experience designing 

buildings for the University of Washington, the 

team possesses a thorough understanding of 

the administrative processes and requirements 

at the University of Washington. From discussing 

design concepts and details with the Architectural 

Commission to meeting with the Lock Shop on the 

appropriate hardware specifications; from interacting 

closely with future building occupants to paying heed 

to the Facility Services Design Guide, LMN has had 

continuous experience with the university’s processes 

for over twenty years.

8 

Sustainable 

Design 

Experience 



Sustainable 

Design Experience 

LMN’s LEED Platinum certified Vancouver Convention 

Centre features a 6.5 acre living roof that is the largest 

in Canada. The Performing Arts Center at City College 

of San Francisco will employ ground sourced heat 

pumps, radiant ceiling panels and natural ventilation 

to achieve unprecedented energy efficiency in a 

performing arts project. The University of Washington’s 

PACCAR Hall was recently certified LEED Gold. The 

glass-enclosed Seattle Central Library is triple the 

volume of the previous library and yet uses 50% less 

energy than a comparable baseline building. LMN is a 

leader in the design of energy efficient and sustainable 

buildings. 

At LMN, our goal is to achieve fully integrated 

architectural designs that resolve user needs, 

site relationships, technical execution and budget 

requirements. We embrace the LEED rating system – 

not as a checklist to be overlaid on the project – but as 

a starting point for truly integrated sustainable design. 

These core values are firmly established in the culture 

of our office. We are a nationally recognized leader 

in green architecture with over 36 LEED accredited 

professionals on our staff. We have received numerous 

awards for environmentally sensitive design including 

an AIA national Committee on the Environment Top Ten 

Award for the Vancouver Convention Centre. LMN’s 

experience and enthusiasm for sustainable design 

will make us effective partners in achieving a facility 

emblematic of the University’s commitment and 

leadership in environmental responsibility and energy 

efficiency. 

LMN Team 


Facing Page: 

Jones Playhouse, University of Washington, LEED Gold (LMN) 

Dean Clark, LEED AP, will lead the design team as project 

manager and will lead the sustainable design efforts on 

the Animal Research and Care Facility. Dean recently 

guided the Amazon South Lake Union Phases 2 and 3 

projects to LEED Gold certifications. Dean combines 

a deep understanding of sustainable design principles 

with a commitment to an integrated and collaborative 

approach to design. Dean will be assisted by the 

entire LMN team who bring extensive experience in 

sustainable design and, specifically, the LEED rating 

system. Sam Miller, LMN’s sustainable design leader, will 

be a resource to the project team as he was on the UW 

PACCAR Hall and Playhouse Theatre projects 

Technology and Integrated Design Approach 

We are committed to the use of computer technology 

in all phases and aspects of project execution. We will 

utilize Building Information Modeling (BIM) as part 

of an overall framework of computational modeling 

that is completely integrated with our design and 

documentation process. In addition to enhancing the 

level of coordination between the project team, LMN’s 

Tech Studio is at the forefront of “GreenBIM” — the 

application of BIM to run environmental simulations 

(light, heat, air flow, and energy consumption) in order 

to predict and improve building performance during the 

early phases of design. To this end, we have developed 

interoperability links between various software 

programs and simulation engines to effectively utilize 

iterative modeling and simulation during all phases 

of design. Our expertise with design technology goes 

beyond simulation. We are also actively engaged with 

parametric modeling and digital fabrication. Taking 

a parametric approach to geometric form allows us


Performing Arts Complex, City College of San Francisco, CA. Targeting 

LEED Gold. 

unparalleled control over the quality and fidelity of our 

models, a critical aspect of good energy modeling. 

Because an effective computational modeling 

process requires a high level of rigor and consistency 

between projects, LMN’s Tech Studio is responsible for 

integration of advanced simulation technology (lighting, 

computational fluid dynamics and finite element 

analysis) with the architectural design process, and 

for leveraging the power of BIM to study and represent 

architectural solutions accurately and efficiently. 

Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

Within the framework of our pro-active cost modeling 

process, LMN works closely with our cost consultant 

and general contractor to provide life cycle cost 

analysis based on the Owner’s intended use of the 

facility. This entails a rigorous process of evaluating 

alternative building systems and components to 

determine the best long-term solutions for the project. 

From our extensive experience in the design of stateof-the-art 

educational facilities, we understand that the 

specific technical and code requirements entail robust 

systems and building components to appropriately 

fulfill their intended use. These considerations are 

integral aspects in our process of assessing alternative 

building systems. 

In collaboration with the University’s project manager 

and facility representatives, we define a specific lifecycle 

cost plan to comprehensively evaluate alternative 

capital expenditures and set budgets associated with 

those expenditures. All future costs are translated to an 

agreed-upon, consistent point in time, inclusive of the 

following categories: 

Industrial and Engineering Technology Building, Central Washington 

University. Ellensburg, WA. Targeting LEED Platinum. 

• Initial costs — purchase, acquisition, construction 

• Fuel and energy costs 

• Operation, maintenance and repair costs 

• System replacement costs 

• Residual values — resale or salvage values or 

disposal costs 

• Finance charges — loan interest payments 

• Research grants 

• Utility company grants 

• Non-monetary benefits or costs 

When clear variation in life-cycle costs exists between 

alternative building systems and components, this 

provides a valuable tool in the optimization of sustainable 

design within the framework of available funding. 

The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Medical 

Research Building, LEED Gold (Ballinger) 

Built on a brownfield site close to public transit, 

the project incorporates aggressive energy-saving 

features such as energy recovery technology, strategic 

daylighting, and energy-efficient chilled beams, as well 

as a green housekeeping program. 

University of Wisconsin Sciences Research Building, 

LEED Gold (Ballinger) 

Every aspect of the building is addressed through 

sustainability strategies, including high-efficiency 

fume hoods, energy-efficient chilled beams, renewable 

materials.and independent commissioning. Surface 

water runoff is managed on-site, and the cafeteria 

sources local and organic food suppliers.

PACCAR Hall, Foster School of Business, Seattle, WA. Certified LEED 

Gold. 

NJEDA Camden Technology Park, Incubator Research 

Building, LEED Gold (Ballinger) 

Located in a distressed urban revitalization zone, this 

project addresses social as well as environmental 

sustainability issues. The design incorporates a full host 

of energy-efficiency technology, surface water runoff 

management, renewable materials, and daylighting 

strategies, with independent commissioning. 

Seattle Central Library, Seattle, WA, LEED Silver (LMN) 

This innovative project includes a storm water 

collection system that collects and stores storm water 

for landscape irrigation. Hybrid engineering systems 

have reduced the building’s energy use to below that of 

the significantly smaller previous library. 

Vancouver Convention Centre West, Vancouver, BC, LEED 

Platinum (LMN) 

Sustainable strategies include an irrigation system that 

uses treated building black water, the largest living roof 

in Canada, and deep water heating and cooling sources 

from the adjoining ocean sound. LMN worked with 

marine ecologists to incorporate a restored fish habitat 

on what was previously a contaminated industrial site. 

Performing Arts Center, City College of San Francisco, CA, 

Targeting LEED Gold (LMN) 

Applying an array of innovative solutions including a 

living roof, geothermal heat pumps, radiant ceilings, 

and natural ventilation, this project represents a 

pioneering effort in the application of sustainable 

design strategies to performing arts projects. 


Vancouver Convention Centre West, Vancouver BC, Canada. Certified 

LEED Platinum. 

PACCAR Hall, Foster School of Business, University of 

Washington, Seattle, WA, LEED Gold (LMN) 

The UW Business School incorporates an integrated 

and holistic approach to sustainability. Numerous 

strategies were employed including: appropriate 

building siting allowing the preservation of significant 

trees, low-flow plumbing fixtures, bike locker facilities, 

operable windows, superior daylighting strategies and 

displacement air systems. 

Central Washington University Industrial and 

Engineering Technology Building, Ellensburg, WA, 

Targeting LEED Platinum (LMN) 

Located in the windiest part of the state, the users 

of this building will be training future wind turbine 

designers and technicians. The design of the building 

includes a “working roof” where a variety of wind 

turbines will be mounted for testing and teaching 

purposes. This BIM project is extensively modeling 

natural daylighting and energy strategies. 

Floyd & Delores Jones Playhouse, University of 

Washington, Seattle, WA, LEED Gold (LMN) 

The renovation of this existing theatre used innovative 

solutions for an institutional performing arts facility. 

During the design process, structural and finish 

materials were evaluated for salvage value and 

integrated into the design in the form of window 

mullions, exterior facade components and scenic 

elements within the theatre. Mechanical systems 

include a building wide, energy efficient hydronic 

heating and cooling system and natural ventilation and 

radiant heating in the lobby.


9 

Staff 

Experience & 

Availability 



Staff Experience & 

Availability 

We are proposing a select group of creative, proactive, 

and enthusiastic individuals who comprise the LMN- 

Ballinger core team for the UW Animal Research and 

Care Facility. Together the team offers proven skills in 

the programming and design of vivariums. Utilizing our 

deep knowledge of the project type along with a proven 

record of effective project management, technical 

execution, and communication, our team has the right 

skills to successfully complete the Animal Research 

and Care Facility. 

Key Team Members 

LMN 

Partner-in-Charge 

George Shaw, AIA, LEED AP 

Design Partner 

Mark Reddington, FAIA 

Project Manager 

Dean Clark, AIA, LEED AP 

Project Architect 

Chuoc Lam 

Ballinger 

Management Principal 

Jeffrey S. French, FAIA 

Design Principal 

Terry Steelman, FAIA, LEED AP 


Dean R. Johnson, AIA 

Project Architect 

Josh Levy, AIA, LEED AP 


Lab Planner, Principal 

Josh Meyer, AIA 

Lab Planner 

Richard D. Kalish, AIA 



Staffing Plan 

Our proposed team is ideally configured for this 

assignment. We have carefully evaluated the 

projected staffing requirements for these individuals 

and for the UW Animal Research and Care Facility 

and we can confirm their availability for the project 

according to the following staffing plan. 

Staff Commitment to the UW Animal Research & Care Facility 

% of time, by project phase 

Role PD SD DD CD CA 

George Shaw, AIA, LEED AP 

LMN Partner in Charge 

Mark Reddington, FAIA 

LMN Design Partner 

Dean Clark, AIA, LEED AP 

LMN Project Manager 

Chuoc Lam 

LMN Project Architect 

Jeffrey S. French, FAIA 

Ballinger Management Principal 

Terry Steelman, FAIA, LEED AP 

Ballinger Design Principal 

Dean R. Johnson, AIA 

Ballinger Project Manager 

Josh Levy, AIA, LEED AP 

Ballinger Project Architect 

Josh Meyer, AIA 

Jacobs Managing Principal 

Richard D. Kalish, AIA 

Jacobs Principal 

Resumes 

Resumes of the core team members begin on the 

following page. 

25 25 25 10 5 

25 25 25 10 5 

75 100 100 75 25 

50 100 100 100 100 

30 30 25 20 10 

40 50 40 30 20 

50 60 60 50 30 

25 40 60 80 30 

20 20 5 0 0 

40 40 30 20 10

George Shaw 

AIA. LEED AP 

George Shaw is a recognized authority 

in architectural planning and design of 

major higher education, performing arts, 

and civic facilities across the country. 

With an emphasis on overall project 

leadership and the integration of design with 

technical development and environmental 

sustainability, his involvement spans 

all project phases—from programming 

and concept design through technical 

documentation and project delivery. 

Partner-in-Charge, LMN 


Education 

Bachelor of Architecture, 1977, University of California, Berkeley 

Professional Registration 

National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) 

State Registrations 

Washington, California, Texas 

Professional Affiliations & Accreditations 

American Institute of Architects (AIA) 

Society for College and University Planning (SCUP) 

LEED Accredited Professional 

President AIA Seattle, 2010-2011 

Selected Higher Education Experience 

- University of Washington, Seattle, WA 

PACCAR Hall, Foster School of Business 

Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science & Engineering, 

Chemistry Building 

- Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 

Carver Academic Renovation 

Chemistry Building Addition 

- Utah State University, Logan, UT 

Huntsman School of Business Addition 

- University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 

School of Music 

- Washington State University, Pullman, WA 

Biotechnology/Life Sciences Facility 

Research & Education Complex Master Plan 

International Studies/Sciences-Joint Center Predesign 

- Washington State University, Spokane, WA 

Intercollegiate College of Nursing Building 

- Washington State University, Vancouver, WA 

Engineering & Computer Science Building 

- Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA 

Nutritional Exercise Health Sciences Building Predesign 

Industrial and Engineering Technology Building 

- Eastern Washington University, Cheney, WA 

Science Center Predesign 

- Everett Community College, Everett, WA 

Campus Master Plan 

Whitehorse Hall Arts & Science Buildng 

Gray Wolf Hall Undergraduate Education Center 

- Bellevue College, Bellevue, WA 

Health Sciences Building


Mark Reddington 

FAIA 

Mark Reddington is widely recognized for 

integrative design of civic places that are 

highly functional and contextually engaging. 

His award-winning designs of music 

buildings and performing arts schools on 

higher education campuses, concert halls, 

performing arts centers, and other civic 

projects across the country and in Canada 

have established the firm as a national 

leader in public building design. 

Mark’s work has been published nationally 

and internationally throughout Europe 

and Asia, demonstrated by widespread 

acclaim not only from architecture critics, 

but also urban design writers, music and 

arts experts, technical journals, accessibility 

advocates, broadcast media, and civic 

Design Partner, LMN 

Education 

Bachelor of Architecture, 1977, University of Cincinnati 

Professional Registration 

National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) 


Washington, Ohio, New Jersey, Tennessee, Colorado, Nevada, 

Minnesota, Iowa, Texas 



Medical Center Main Entrance Upgrade 

Michael G. Foster School of Business, Phase I & II 

Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science & Engineering 

Alaska Airlines Arena (Hec Ed Pavilion) Renovation 

Support Services Building 



Research & Education Complex Master Plan 

International Studies/Sciences-Joint Center 




Carver Academic Renovation 

Viking Commons and Student Union Renovation 

- University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 

School of Music 

- Utah State University, Logan, UT 

Huntsman School of Business Addition 

- University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 

Conrad Prebys Music Center 

- City College of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 

Performing Arts Center 



- Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA 

Industrial & Engineering Technology Building 

- Seattle Pacific University, Seattle, WA 

Gwinn Commons 

- University of Washington, Tacoma, WA 

Campus Creation Master Plan 

Dougan Building Arts Lab Addition 

Auditorium Building

Dean G. Clark 

AIA, LEED AP 

Dean Clark has over 25 years of experience 

in project management for a diverse range 

of building types, including both complex 

and fast-track projects. His involvement 

with the full range of project phases, from 

programming and concept design through 

construction administration, has provided 

Dean with the broad knowledge and 

specialized expertise needed to lead design 

teams. His ability to discern and resolve 

fundamental planning and design issues, 

combined with his management and cost 

control skills, ensure a highly creative and 

effectively organized design and project 

delivery process. 

Project Manager, LMN 



Education 

Master of Architecture, 1977, University of California, Los Angeles 

Bachelor of Arts, Environmental Design, 1974, University of 

Washington 


Washington 

Professional Affiliations & Accreditations 

American Institute of Architects (AIA) 

LEED Accredited Professional 






Chemistry Building 

Husky Hall of Fame, Bank of America Arena 

Henry Art Gallery Expansion and Renovation 

West Campus Parking Facility 

Support Services Building 

Intercollegiate Athletics Facilities Project* 

School of Nursing Research Laboratories* 


Campus Services Facility Predesign Study 

- University of Washington, Tacoma, WA 

Tacoma Campus, Phase I 

- Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington 

Nutritional Exercise Health Sciences Building Predesign 

Higher Education Center at Highline Community College 



Science Building, Phases I, II & III* 

- Bellevue College, Bellevue, WA 

Health Sciences Building 

Campus Master Plan Update 

- Seattle University, Seattle, WA 

Pigott Auditorium Remodel 

- Highline Community College, Des Moines, WA 

Allied Health Building Predesign 

* Project experience prior to joining LMN.


Terry Steelman 

FAIA, LEED AP 

In his 30 years of practice, Terry has 

become a nationally acclaimed designer and 

recipient of a dozen national, international 

and state design awards. He has led 

both the planning and design efforts for 

a variety of clients resulting in campus 

headquarters and research facilities, urban 

redevelopment, multistoried housing, and 

higher education facilities. In addition to 

practice, Terry has taught architectural 

design at several universities in the 

United States and served as the Chair of 

Architecture for Syracuse University in 

Florence, Italy. 

- Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 

Food Science & Technology Center 

Master Plan 

- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 

Medical Education Building 

- Cephalon, Inc., West Chester, PA 

Corporate and Research Headquarters 

Master Plan 

- DuPont Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE 

Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics Facility 

- Hercules Inc., Wilmington, DE 

Research center campus 

- Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, North Brunswick, NJ 

Haemostasis Research Laboratory 

- Rohm & Haas, Bristol, PA 

Master plan and laboratory consolidation 

Design Principal, Ballinger 

Education 

Washington University, Master of Architecture, 1982 

University of Texas School of Architecture, Bachelor of 

Science, 1977 

Registration 

Delaware, Indiana, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, 

Texas, Rhode Island, NCARB 

Professional Affiliations 

The American Institute of Architects 

Pennsylvania Society of Architects 

International Society for College and University Planning 

International Development Research Council 

Selected Relevant Experience 

- The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA 

South Campus Master Plan 


- Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 


College of Veterinary Medicine Master Plan 

School of Engineering Master Plan 

Snee Hall Energy Institute 

Philips Hall Expansion 

- The University of Texas, Austin, TX 

Cockrell School of Engineering Master Plan 

- The George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 

Engineering & Science Hall 

- Brown University, Providence, RI 


- Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ 

Henry M. Rowan Hall 

College of Engineering 

- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 

Land Use Management Plan 

- Cabrini College, Radnor, PA 

Sports and Recreational Facility 

- Culver Academies, Culver, IN 

Math and science building 

- Duke University, Durham, NC 

Washington Duke Inn 

- Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA 

Interdisciplinary sciences facility 

- Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, PA 

Science Center 

- LaSalle University, Philadelphia, PA 

Holroyd Hall 

- University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 

School of Nursing

Jeffrey S. French 

FAIA 

During his 33 years at Ballinger, Jeff 

has managed major academic science 

initiatives ranging from biology-based life 

science research to engineering to teaching 

facilities, organizing the process and 

ensuring that client goals are driving the 

work. Clients include such institutions as 

Brown University, Cornell University, Johns 

Hopkins University, Virginia Commonwealth 

University, University of Maryland, and 

University of Wisconsin. 

Mr. French has assisted institutions in grant 

proposal preparation for NIH, NSF, NASA, 

and NIST applications. He has served as 

a grant review panelist for both NIH and 

NSF, and he has lectured for organizations 

such as the Wisconsin Alumni Research 

Foundation’s Gilson Discovery Series 

and the New York Academy of Sciences. 

He co-authored the NSF guidebook on 

academic research facility planning, was an 

invited contributor to the Higher Education 

Colloquium on Science Facilities, was an 

invited consultant to the Kyoto Research 

Park in Japan, and is co-editor of an edition 

of the Annals of the New York Academy 

of Sciences. In 1999, he was elevated to 

Fellowship in The American Institute of 

Management Principal, Ballinger 




Master Plan for Animal Facilities 

- The Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA 

Master Plan and New Research Center 


Education 

Princeton University, Bachelor of Arts, Architecture 

and Urban Planning, 1976 

University of Virginia, Master of Architecture, 1978 

Registrations 

Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, 

Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, 

Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, 

South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia 

Professional Organizations & Affiliations 

New York Academy of Sciences 

Society for College and University Planning 

Fellow, The American Institute of Architects 

Greater Philadelphia First Corporation, Professional 

Services Cluster Team 

Association of American Medical Colleges 

- University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 

School of Veterinary Medicine 

- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 

College of Veterinary Medicine 

- University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 

Wisconsin Institute for Discovery / 

Morgridge Institute for Research 

- Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 

School of Medicine 

- Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., Blue Ash, OH 

Research and Training Institute 

- College of Charleston, Charleston, SC 

Laboratory and Teaching Facility 

Master Plan for School of Science & Math 

- Hope College, Holland, MI 

Peale Science Center 

- The George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 

Engineering & Science Hall 

- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 

Chemistry Research Building 

Science Quad Master Plan 



- University of Maryland, College Park, MD 

Bioscience Research Building 

- Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 

Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment


Dean R. Johnson 

AIA 

During more than 35 years as a practicing 

architect, Mr. Johnson has managed 

the design and development of large, 

complex facilities for various healthcare, 

academic and corporate entities across 

the country. Dean’s commitment to the 

client is unique, as is his attention to detail 

which results in cost and quality benefits 

throughout the project life cycle. Dean, an 

Associate Principal at Ballinger, recently 

completed a major new building for The 

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. The 

project, designed and constructed in two 

phases, totals 725,000 SF at a cost of 

$395,000,000. 

Senior Project Manager, Ballinger 

Education 

University of Oklahoma, Master of Architecture, 1976 

University of Oklahoma, Bachelor of Science in 

Environmental Design, 1973 

Registrations 

Texas, NCARB 

Professional Affiliations 





- The University of Texas, Austin, TX 

Cockrell School of Engineering Master Plan 



Phase III Replacement of East Side Facade 

- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 

Golisano Children’s Hospital at Strong 

- ExcelleRx, Philadelphia, PA 

Corporate Headquarters fit-out & relocation 

- Janssen Pharmaceutica, Titusville, NJ 

Corporate headquarters addition 

Master Plan 

- Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 

K15 Biologics Lab & CCPD 

- Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Princeton, NJ 

Interior fit-out and facility management services 

- Patrinely Group, Princeton, NJ 

5-story commercial office buildings 

- Wells Fargo Bank Plaza, Houston, TX* 

71-story commercial office building for Century Development 

Corporation 

- Southeast Financial Center, Miami, FL* 

55-story commercial office building 

- Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, MN* 

A 40-story and 22-story twin tower, commercial office 

building 

- 100 First Plaza, San Francisco, CA* 

* Project experience prior to joining Ballinger.

Josh Levy 

AIA, LEED AP 

Mr. Levy has a strong background in a wide 

variety of building typologies. In his 11 years 

with Ballinger, Josh has focused on the 

design and documentation of Ballinger’s 

most technically complex projects. 

During his tenure, he has been a studio 

manager responsible for coordinating and 

overseeing the work of our corporate and 

institutional projects and clients. In addition 

to his management and project specific 

responsibilities, he is the Architectural QA/ 

QC Coordinator and Technical Lead typically 

assigned to Quality Assurance and Review of 

major projects at Ballinger. 

Senior Project Architect, Ballinger 



Education 

Syracuse University, Master of Architecture, 1989 

Syracuse University Center in Italy, Florence, Italy, 1988 

Brandeis University, Bachelor of Arts in Psychology, 1985 

Harvard University, Career Discovery Program, 1984 

Registrations 

Pennsylvania 

Teaching Experience 

Syracuse University, Visiting Critic 

Drexel University, Visiting Critic 


South Campus Development 


- Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 

K15 Biologics Lab & CCPD 

- Merck & Co., Inc., North Wales, PA 

U.S. Human Health Headquarters 

- Aegis Development, Princeton, NJ 

Office building 

- The Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA 

Facility Master Plan 

- Boeing, Ridley Park, PA 

Building 361 Focus Factory 



- College of Charleston, Charleston, SC 

Science and Research Facility 

- DuPont Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE 

Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics Facility 



- University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 

Annenberg Public Policy Center 

- Barnes Foundation, Philadelphia, PA 

New Art Education Center 

- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 

Chemistry Research Building 

- University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD 

Phase IV Expansion


Josh Meyer 

AIA 

As managing principal of Jacobs Consultancy 

Inc., Josh Meyer has exclusively programmed 

and designed laboratory and animal facilities 

for over 28 years. Mr. Meyer is a recognized 

leader in the programming and design of 

research and instructional laboratories and 

has an unparalleled understanding of the 

industry. He is a licensed architect in the State 

of New York and a member of the Society for 

College & University Planning. His expertise 

includes facilities analysis, facilities macro- and 

micro- development and vivarium design. Mr. 

Meyer frequently lectures on the planning of 

laboratories and animal facilities. 

Mr. Meyer’s accomplishments in laboratory 

design include more than 120 projects at the 

top institutions, corporate research facilities and 

government laboratories throughout the country. 

Managing Principal, Jacobs Consultancy 

Education 

Bachelor of Architecture, The Cooper Union 

Registrations 

New York 

Memberships 


New York State Chapter, member 

Westchester County Chapter, member 

American National Academy of Sciences, member of the Committee 

on Cost of and Payment for Animal Research, Institute of Laboratory 

Animal Research, National Research Council 



Vivarium Master Plan 

Health Science Precinct Plan (HSPP) 

Vista Vivarium Feasibility Study for the Central Vivarium 

Remodel & Addition 


Global Animal Health Building – Phase 1 

Veterinary Medicine Research Building 


Riverpoint Biomedical & Health Sciences Building Master Plan 

- Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA 

Animal Facilities Master Plan 


- US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Ames IA 


- Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 

Transgenic Mouse Facility (TMF) 

Research Resources Master Plan 

- University of Pennsylvania/Hospital of the University 

of Pennsylvania/Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 


Philadelphia Convention Center Site Master Plan 

- Boston University, Boston, MA 

Laboratory/Animal Care Facility Master Plan 

- Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 

Biological Resources Infrastructure (BRI) 

- The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 

Baltimore, MD 

Broadway Research Building 

- University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 

Gordon Center for Integrative Science 

- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 

Parnassus Services Seismic Replacement Building 

Mission Bay Cardiovascular Research Institute

- University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI 

Biomedical Sciences Research Building 

Animal Facility Master Plan 

- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 

Molecular & Cell Biology Building 

Biomedical Discovery District Phase II 

- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 

Mortimer B. Zuckerman Building 

Facilities Master Plan 

- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Boston, MA 

Center for Life Science 

- Brigham and Women’s Hospital/Partners Healthcare 

System, Boston, MA 

Brigham Building for the Future Progam 

- Carnegie Mellon University/University of Pittsburgh, 

Pittsburgh, PA 

Center for Neural Basis of Cognition 

- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA 

Advanced Health Sciences Pavilion 

Research Campus Facilities Master Plan 

- Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA 

Infectious Disease Laboratory – Building 17 

- Children’s Hospital Boston, Boston, MA 

Animal Facilities Master Plan 

Enders Tower Expansion 

Karp Family Research Laboratories 

- Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH 

Location T Research Building 

Institute for Developmental Research Expansion I 

Clinical Laboratory 

Institute for Developmental Research Expansion II 

Institute for Developmental Research Expansion III 

Location S Research Building 

- Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH 

Research Building III & Orthopedic Center 

Wexner Center for Pediatric Research – Primate Facility 

Transgenic Mouse Facility 

Wexner Center for Pediatric Research – Fitup of Floors 4 & 5 

Research Building II 

- Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 

H. Russell & Jeanne R. Smith Research Tower 

- The City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY 

Advanced Science Research Center / City College of New York 

Science Project 

- Columbia University, New York, NY 

Institute for Comparative Medicine Vivarium Master Plan 

Manhattanville Mind, Brain & Behavior Building 

New Manhattanville Campus Master Plan 

Northwest Science Building 

- Cornell University, New York State College of Veterinary 

Medicine, Ithaca, NY 

Academic/Research/Teaching Hospital 


Biotech Transgenic Mouse Facility 

Weill Hall & Weill Hall Institute - Life Sciences Technology 

Building 

- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 

450 Brookline Avenue Building Project 


Animal Resources Facility, Smith Floors 11 & 12 Renovation 

Imaging Research Facility 

Longwood Center Tenant Fit-Out 

- Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 

Moore Hall Psychology Building 

Life Sciences Building 

- Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH 

Medical School Space Planning & Benchmarking 

- Duke University, Raleigh, NC 

The Fitzpatrick Center for Interdisciplinary Engineering and 

Medical Applied Sciences 

Medical Center Research Resources Master Plan 

- Emory University, Atlanta, GA 

Robert W. Woodruff Health Science Center Master Plan & 

Research Facility Utilization Study 

Health Science Research Building 

- Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 

Medical School Assessment of Animal Resource Program 

Biological Laboratories Basement Floor Interim Vivarium 

Northwest Research Building 

Allston Campus Science Building Complex 

Harvard Institutes of Medicine Renovation of Boston English 

High School 

- The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, ME 

Genetics Resource Building 

- The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 

Zanvyl Krieger Mind/Brain Institute, Homewood Campus 

- The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 

Baltimore, MD 

Richard Starr Ross Research Building 

Traylor 4, 5, 7 & 8 Floor Renovations 

Animal Facility Master Plan 

The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center 

- Kansas University Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 

Biomedical Research Building 

- Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA 

Research Expansion Project 

- Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA 

Clinical / Research Building 

- The Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 

Guggenheim Building Expansion 

- Medical College of Wisconsin & The Children’s Research 

Institute, Milwaukee, WI 

Biomedical Research Facility 

- Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 

Biomedical Research Building II 

- The Methodist Hospital System, Houston, TX 

The Methodist Research Institute 

- The Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 

Icahn Medical Research Building 

Institute for Translational Research Study 

Center for Science and Medicine 

- National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD 

The Louis Stokes Laboratories - Building 50 

John Edward Porter Neuroscience Research Center 

- New York State Office of Mental Health, New York, NY 

New York Psychiatric Institute


Richard D. Kalish 

AIA 

As a Principal for over 10 years, Richard Kalish 

is responsible for laboratory programming and 

design consulting services for institutional, 

corporate, and governmental clientele. Located 

in our Solana Beach, CA. office, Richard is 

an expert at developing innovative, practical 

laboratory planning solutions for clients 

throughout the United States. With 31 years 

of experience as an architect and laboratory 

planner, Richard integrates the design of the 

laboratory to the working environment of each 

user group. Mr. Kalish’s expertise includes 

undergraduate science facilities, institutional 

research laboratories, and local and federal 

government facilities. 

- University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 

Li Ka-Shing Center for Biomedical & Health Sciences 

- University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 

Snyder Hall Renovation 

Cancer Center 

- J. Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, CA 

New Research Institute 

- Children’s Hospital Seattle, Seattle, WA 

Programming & Utilization Analysis 

- University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA 

The Clinical Translational Research Institute 

- University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 

Convergence of Molecular Science and Engineering (CMSE) 

Building 

- University of Miami, Miami, FL 

Life Science Park (UMLSP) 

Principal, Jacobs Consultancy 

Education 

Bachelor of Arts, Architecture, cume laude 

Washington University at St. Louis 

Registrations 

California 

Affiliations 



- University of Washington Health Science Center, Seattle WA 

Health Science Precinct Plan (HSPP) 


Vista Vivarium Feasibility Study for the Central Vivarium 

Remodel & Addition 

Medicine Lake Union Phase 3.1 

Vivarium Peer Review 

- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ames, IA 


- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 

Cardiovascular Research Institute, Building 17A/B 

Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center / Mission 

Bay 17C 

Regenerative Medicine Institute 

Building 19A Neuroscience Phase 1 

Mayor Hall Addition/Renovation 

- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 

Biomedical Discovery District 

Jackson Hall Remodel, Research Core Labs 

- Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR 

Bio-Medical Research Building 

- University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 

Eli & Edythe Broad CIRM Center for Regenerative Medicine 

Harlyne J. Norris Research Tower 

Ray R. Irani Hall 

Seeley G. Mudd - 2nd Floor Chemical Research Laboratory 

Renovation 

Doheny Eye Institute 

- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 

CHS South Tower Seismic Renovation 

Semel Institute – The Nexus Project Feasibility Study 

California Nanosystems Institute 

- Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA 

Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA 

Research A Building & Biological Resources Building

10 

Quality 

Assurance 

Plan 



Quality 

Assurance Plan 

Include the specific methodology that will be used to 

cross-check all plans of the various disciplines to one 

another and for completeness and accuracy at each 

submittal stage. 

LMN’s structured quality assurance regimen is 

organized to maximize communication between 

all design team participants to achieve complete, 

comprehensive and well-coordinated design 

documentation. 

The process, which is administrated by our full-time 

QA Manager, Kathy Stallings, is described in the LMN 

Quality Assurance Process manual. It implements 

rigorous document review and cross-discipline 

checking procedures to ensure thorough, wellcoordinated 

drawings and specifications. Devised and 

developed from 25 years of experience and hundreds 

of successful projects, the LMN QA process embodies 

the following concepts: 

• LMN’s quality assurance program focuses on the 

production of documents that are consistent and 

continuous through each phase of design and fulfill 

the design intent. In addition, bidding documents 

are reviewed to ensure that they convey clear, 

constructible and coordinated information to the 

contractor. 

• LMN’s quality Assurance program utilizes a set of 

phase-specific checklists developed to ensure that 

pre-requisite decisions have been made prior to 

initiating each subsequent phase of design. Quality 

reviews are conducted independent of the project 

team by architects experienced with the project 

type. 


• During design phases, LMN’s QA team 

performs both an Architectural review and 

an Interdisciplinary review, verifying that the 

documents show consistent and coordinated 

information meeting the program requirements. 

Simultaneously, each consulting discipline 

performs a checklist review of its own work and its 

coordination with other disciplines. 

• Prior to the end of the CD phase, drawings 

and specifications undergo Architectural 

and Interdisciplinary checklist reviews by an 

internal, independent QA team with construction 

administration and project type experience. Review 

comments are marked in red and checked in yellow 

upon integration by the project team. Consulting 

disciplines are required to complete and return 

LMN’s prepared checklist as part of reviewing their 

documents for completeness and coordination 

with other disciplines. 

• Utilizing BIM provides enhanced document 

checking. The design BIM model is begun in the 

SD phase and develops until bid documents 

are finalized. For disciplines modeling in BIM, 

clash detection is conducted at key points by the 

project team. Near the end of the CD phase the 

quality assurance checklists are used to verify 

coordination between disciplines within the model. 

• At completion of each quality review, the QA 

team meets with the project team to discuss the 

findings of the quality review after which the team 

integrates the comments into the set. All quality 

review documents are kept as part of the project 

record through construction.


One of the exceptional benefits of the QA process 

is the cross-project interaction that it instills in our 

staff. Technical research and analysis is extensively 

shared between projects, providing immeasurable 

value to each design assignment. In addition, we 

frequently employ the project QA reviewer in the 

construction administration phase of the project. This 

provides important team continuity and continues the 

commitment to quality assurance through construction 

completion, commissioning and occupancy. 

Provide a checklist of items that will be researched 

during the on-site investigation. 

On-Site Investigation 

On site investigation for the Animal Research and Care 

Facility should include: 

• Gaining a thorough understanding of the adjacent 

buildings, their functions, materiality, code status, 

and opportunities for programmatic and/or 

physical linkages. 

• Obtaining information on central plant utility 

availability and location. 

• Acquiring detailed knowledge of the existing 

loading dock. 

• Exploration of service access points for the new 

facility. 

• If necessary, a traffic study (by others) outlining the 

impact of additional vehicles at this location. 

• Survey information (by others) including existing 

adjacent building locations and floor elevations, 

site topography, property lines, right-of-way data, 

fire hydrant locations, underground utility locations 

and depths, and site benchmark datum. 

• Geotechnical report (by others) including soil 

boring data, water table location and monitoring 

plan, and recommendations on soil bearing 

capacities, lateral loading, sub-grade treatment for 

buildings and pavements, foundation systems, and 

waterproofing systems. 

• Environmental assessment (by others) of the 

property outlining known and potential existing 

hazards. 

Provide a system for tracking and documenting all 

changes to the Project Program. 

Program Tracking 

Program space requirements are tracked through 

a master spreadsheet. As changes are made, the 

baseline program is moved to a “history” column 

and the revised program takes precedence. This is 

repeated at each milestone and significant change, 

resulting in a string of programs that reveal the 

evolution of the space requirements. Additionally, room 

diagrams and technical program sheets are prepared 

and updated as changes occur in order to keep track of 

the detailed requirements.

11 

MWBE 

Outreach Plan 



MWBE 

Outreach Plan 

1. Purpose and Commitment 

LMN values our employees and business partners 

as integral to our continuing success. LMN has 

established this Diversity & Outreach Plan to assure 

that our business policies and practices support and 

actively promote the goal of equal opportunity in all 

aspects of employment, procurement, contracting, and 

community involvement. We have these objectives: 

• Employ diverse staff and contract with business 

partners that reflect and respect different cultures, 

capabilities, genders, and ages 

• Create and maintain a work environment with 

policies, procedures, and systems that support and 

encourage diversity 

• LMN is committed to equal opportunity for 

employment without regard to race, gender, age, 

marital status, sexual orientation, religion, national 

origin, citizenship status, disability, or any other 

protected status. This policy applies to but is not 

limited to recruiting, hiring, promoting, training, and 

all other actions related to employment such as 

compensation, benefits, lay-offs, reinstatements, 

and disciplinary actions 

• LMN considers its business partners, primarily 

its technical consultants, to be important to the 

firm’s success. Therefore, we are committed to 

applying the principles of diversity and equal 

opportunity to our selection and contracting 

practices. Management and staff will assure that 

opportunities for doing business with LMN are open 

to all qualified vendors and consultants. Outreach 

efforts will be made to identify and include certified 


minority-, women-, and disabled-owned enterprises 

(MWBEs) for those opportunities. 

2. Responsibility and Authority 

The ultimate responsibility for this Diversity & 

Outreach Plan rests with the Partnership; however, 

implementation of the plan is the responsibility of the 

Managing Partner. Successful implementation requires 

knowledge and acceptance of the Plan by management 

and staff, and integrating the principles into the daily 

execution of our work. 

Overseeing implementation of this Diversity & Outreach 

Plan will be a Diversity & Outreach Committee 

comprised of the Director of Operations, the Principal 

responsible for recruiting and hiring, the Benefits 

Coordinator, and the Staffing Manager. This committee 

may invite participation by other management or staff 

or by outside consultants as it deems appropriate. This 

committee will be responsible for: 

• Establishing and continuously reviewing the 

objectives of this Diversity & Outreach Plan 

• Meeting periodically to review progress toward the 

objectives 

• Assessing areas for improvement and actions 

necessary for implementation 

• Receiving, reviewing, and resolving complaints and 

areas of non-compliance; determining appropriate 

corrective or disciplinary actions 

• Recommending new or improved policies and 

procedures as needed to achieve the objectives.


3. Action Plan 

Participation in the design opportunities acquired by 

LMN will be made available to a broad spectrum of 

potential business partners including MWBEs and 

particularly such businesses that are certified as such 

by the State of Washington. Efforts to achieve and 

maintain such participation with LMN will include: 

• Ensure awareness of the Diversity & Outreach Plan 

objectives through internal and external advertising 

and notices 

• Include notice of the Diversity & Outreach Plan 

objectives in requests for proposals 

• Promote nondiscriminatory practices related to 

selection of vendors, consultants, and contractors. 

a. Community Involvement and Outreach 

LMN is a strong supporter of the annual United 

Way Campaign, often with almost 100% employee 

involvement, and consistently matched 100% by 

the partnership. In 2008 LMN was honored with the 

Chairman’s Award, which salutes campaigns that 

show overall excellence through consistent results in 

employee participation and leadership. 

b. Educational Outreach 

LMN continues to be an active participant in the ACE 

Mentoring Program in Seattle, which encourages high 

school students to consider a career in Architecture, 

Construction, or Engineering. The ACE Mentoring 

Program introduces inner-city students to architecture, 

interior design, construction, and engineering. For 

several years, we have sponsored meetings in our office 

twice monthly during the school year with high school 

students from all walks of life to kindle their interests in 

the design world. In addition, we sponsor middle school 

children who “job shadow” on career day to expose 

them to architecture and interior design. We strongly 

encourage our people to be involved in such activities. 

LMN Partner, Rob Widmeyer, was a founding member 

and continues as a member of their board. LMN is 

an active design firm participant, usually with a large 

number of mentors. 

c. Subcontracting Outreach 

LMN has a successful record of working with MWBE 

firms on past projects as well as engaging the 

consultant community in other forums. In 2008 two 

key LMN employees participated in the UW’s Prime- 

Sub Networking event, representing LMN as a Prime 

Consultant. The event has grown in scope such that in 

2010 and 2011 a larger Regional Contracting Forum was 

held at the Washington State Convention Center. LMN 

had a booth and two key employees participate in both 

events. 

Over the years LMN has worked with MBEs and WBEs 

on more than 110 projects. While there has not been a 

formal program from which statistics can be drawn, we 

feel that working closely with such firms over the years 

has provided many occasions in which LMN has shared 

information and discussed topics such as approaches 

to solving technical and design team problems; 

processes for design, documentation, specifications, 

and quality assurance; and project planning and 

financial controls. While there are characteristics 

common to many projects, each project and each firm 

presents a different set of conditions to which we try to 

respond in a professional and constructive manner. 

d. Economic Development 

LMN is committed to ensuring equal opportunity 

for the vendors, service providers, consultants, and 

contractors who work with the firm so that the entities 

competing for our business reflect the diversity of the 

Washington business community. Our actions will help 

strengthen the economic development and viability of 

local businesses, and will help ensure we receive quality 

goods and services at competitive prices. 

e. Prevention of Profiling Based on Race or National Origin 

Through communicating this plan to all employees, 

LMN will seek to avoid recruiting of any employee or 

selection of any vendor or consultant based on race or 

national origin. 

4. Procedures 

a. Communicating 

Effectiveness of this Diversity & Outreach Plan can 

be enhanced through informing management, staff, 

consultants, contractors, and the general public of the 

plan’s objectives and procedures. Making information 

available regarding the Plan will include: 

• Internal communications 

• Include our Diversity & Outreach Statement in the 

firm’s Employee Handbook 

• Reaffirm annually our commitment to diversity and 

outreach by a notice to all employees 

• Post our statement in suitable areas for exposure 

to employees 

• Explain our plan during employee orientation

• External communications 

• Explain our plan as part of recruiting activities such 

as in advertising and job fairs at schools of design 

(architecture, urban design, and interiors). 

• Make MWBEs aware of our firm’s interest in 

including such firms in our design projects when 

possible. 

b. Training 

LMN will continue to make available and encourage 

attendance at in-house training sessions for technical, 

managerial, and design aspects of our practice across 

all areas of the firm. 

We will continue to provide an annual allowance to all 

employees to be used for training in some aspect of 

work that will contribute to development of relevant 

skills and knowledge. 

5. Monitoring and Reporting 

A process for monitoring progress in achieving the 

firm’s objectives for diversity is essential to evaluate 

the effectiveness of our efforts. Some of the measures: 

• Prepare quarterly summaries of our employees by 

role, ethnicity, and gender (EEO Statement). 

• Maintain statistics on consultant and vendor 

business volumes with MWBEs 

• Prepare periodic reports of quantifiable statistics 

for the Partnership and the Diversity & Outreach 

Committee. 

6. Dispute Resolution 

LMN will seek to: 

• Establish conflict resolution procedures that will 

empower partners and employees in all roles and at 

all levels to work collaboratively to solve problems, 

resolve interpersonal conflicts, and achieve 

mutually satisfying resolutions of disputes 

• Make information about the conflict resolution 

processes widely available. 

7. Identification of Subcontractors 


As opportunities arise for the firm, research certified 

MWBEs that offer services in the disciplines required 

for portions of the firm’s projects. A primary source 

will be listings on line by the State of Washington of 

certified businesses. 

8. Payment Process for Subcontractors 

Payments to vendors and consultants have and will 

continue to be made timely and consistently for 

services rendered or products delivered without regard 

to type or status of the subcontractor. 

9. Removing Barriers 

Our contracting and procurement documents, policies, 

and practices will be reviewed periodically to determine 

if there are features that hinder or create barriers to 

successfully implementing this plan. Any document, 

policy, or practice that gives rise to such barriers will 

be brought to the attention of the Diversity & Outreach 

Committee and revised timely by the appropriate group 

within the firm. 

10. Authorization 

This Diversity Plan was duly adopted by LMN 

Architects, a Washington Partnership, on July 13, 2009. 

It was amended as the firm’s Diversity & Outreach Plan 

in May 2011.


12 

References 



References 

LMN 

Foster School of Business Phase I & II 

University of Washington, Seattle 

Pete Dukes 

Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs 

Accounting Department 

University of Washington 

Phone: 206.543.7141 

rdukes@u.washington.edu 

Steve Tatge 


Capital Project Office 

Phone: 206.221.4231 

statge@u.washington.edu 


Washington State University, Pullman 

Ryan Ruffcorn 


Capital Planning and Development 

Phone: 509.335.8658 

ruffcorn@wsu.edu 

Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science & Engineering 

University of Washington, Seattle 

Edward Lazowska 

Bill & Melinda Gates Chair, Computer Science & Eng 

Phone: 206.543.4755 

lazowska@cs.washington.edu 

Ballinger 


The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia 

John McDonough 

Former Vice President 

610.451.8104 

College of Veterinary Medicine 

Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 

Michael I. Kotlikoff, VMD, PhD 

Dean of Veterinary Medicine 

607.253.3771 

Research Tower 

The Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA 

Dr. Russell Kaufman 

President 

215.898.3774 



Jacobs Consultancy –Josh Meyer 

Biological Research Infrastructure (BRI) Facility 

Havard University, Cambridge, MA 

Mr. Peter Brown, Director, Faculty Arts & Sciences 

16 Divinity Avenue 

Cambridge, MA 02138 

617-384-9563 

pbrown@mcb.harvard.edu 

Biomedical Science Research Building 

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 

Mr. Horace Bomar III, Director of Facilities 

1590 Medical Sciences Research Blvd. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109 

734-647-2788 

hobo@umich.edu 

Parnassus Services Building 

University of California, San Francisco 

Cliff Roberts, Executive Vice Chancellor 

PO Box 0407, Genentech Hall S272, 600-16th Street 

San Francisco, CA 94143-0407 

415-476-1571 

clifford.roberts@ucsf.edu 

Jacobs Consultancy – Rick Kalish 


USDA, Ames, IA 

Dennis Jones, AMB Engineering Project Manager 

USDA, ARS, FD, Ames Modernization Branch 

2020 Dayton Avenue, Ames, IA 50010 

515-663-7218 

djones@nadc.ars.usda.gov 

Smith Cardiovascular Research Building 

University of California, San Francisco 

Dr. Shaun Coughlin, PhD 

UCSF Cardiovascular Research Institute 

555 Mission Bay Blvd South, Box 3122 

San Francisco, CA, 94158 

415-476-6174 

shaun.coughlin@ucsf.edu 

Biomedical Discovery District Phase II 

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 

Lorelee A Wederstrom, Director Campus/College Level 

Academic Health Center 

Health Sciences-Adm 

551 Boyn H S, 410 Church St SE 

Minneapolis, MN 55455 

612-626-7088 

weder001@umn.edu

13 

Contract 

Acceptance 



Contract 

Acceptance 

LMN and Ballinger affirm that the terms 

and conditions of the “Agreement for 

Architectural Services on a GC/CM 

Construction Project OA1” are acceptable. 


Facing Page: PACCAR Hall, University of Washington, Seattle 

Following Page: Biotechnology/Life Sciences Building, Washington 

State University, Pullman




T 206 682 3460 

F 206 343 9388 

www.lmnarchitects.com

Full submission - Office of Planning & Budgeting (OPB) - University ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?