Skirball Cultural Center - Office of Planning & Budgeting (OPB ...

University of Washington 

Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture 

Predesign Study 

Seattle, Washington 

Prepared for: 

Washington State Office of Financial Management 

Prepared by: 

University of Washington Office of Planning & Budgeting 

In Cooperation with: 

University of Washington Capital Projects Office 

With Support from: 

Olson Kundig Architects 

UW Project Number: 20082850 

June 2010 

Photo credit: Storms Photographic, 2007

Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture Predesign Study 

30 June 2010


Table of Contents 

1. Executive Summary 1-1 

2. Project Analysis 

Operational Needs 2-1 

Explore Alternatives 2-1 

Life Cycle Cost Analysis 2-2 

Selected Alternative 2-3 

Scope and Project Description 2-3 

Issues Identification 2-4 

Prior Planning and History 2-4 

Stakeholders 2-5 

Project Description 2-5 

Implementation Approach 2-6 

Project Management 2-6 

Schedule 2-7 

3. Program Analysis 

Assumptions 3-1 

Existing Facilities 3-1 

Space Needs Assessment 3-11 

Space Requirements 3-14 

Future Requirements and Flexibility 3-22 

Codes and Regulations 3-22 

Sustainability and Energy Utilization 3-22 

4. Site Analysis 

Minimizing Costly Mitigation Requirements 4-1 

Existing Site 4-1 

Proposed New Site Elements 4-7 

5. Project Budget Analysis 

Assumptions 5-1 

Project Cost Estimate 5-1 

Form C-3 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Summary 5-3 

Relate the Budget to the Scope of Work 5-5 

6. Master Plan and Policy Coordination 6-1 

7. Facility Operations and Maintenance Requirements 7-1 

8. Project Drawings/Diagrams 

Buildings Plans/Sections 8-1 

Site Plan 8-1 

30 June 2010


Appendix 

• Predesign Checklist 

• Project Participants 

• Form C-4 -- Predesign Capital Project Request Report 

• CBS 360 Cost Estimate Summary 

• Project Budget Detail 

• Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

• Philanthropic Funding Feasibility Report Highlights 

• Sustainability Workshop Notes 

• LEED for New Construction v2.2 Checklist, 

• Environmental Design Consideration Form 

30 June 2010


1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The renovation of the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture is a critical component of its pledge to 

the community to “inspire people to value their connection with all life—and act accordingly.” In the 2007- 

09 biennium, the legislature appropriated and the Board of Regents approved the expenditure of 

$300,000 for a predesign study for the Burke renovation. The total project budget is $52,500,000 to 

renovate and transform the approximately 67,000 gross square feet two-story brick building. The 

remodeled and re-envisioned Burke will be a significantly more engaging, educational, and efficient 

museum for the citizens of Washington. 

The legislature also requested a feasibility study and plan for covering at least one-third of the project cost 

through non-state sources (section 5021). These have both been completed and a summary of the funding 

feasibility study is included in the Appendix. 

In a time of intense global change, using specimens from our natural and cultural world to educate our 

residents and visitors is more important than ever. The Burke’s collections, exhibits, and educational 

programs foster understanding of issues that are central to our survival, including environmental 

sustainability, cultural understanding, and the interconnections of all life. This project will transform the 

Burke’s place in the community and allow us to meet the needs of 21 st century Washington State and 

ensure that our citizens’ irreplaceable resources are protected, publicly accessible, and meaningful for 

future generations. 

Founded in 1885 and declared the Washington State Museum in 1899, the Burke has served state 

communities for 125 years. The museum welcomes a broad and diverse audience and provides a 

community gathering place that nurtures life-long learning and encourages respect, responsibility, and 

reflection. Audiences rely on the Burke for exhibits and educational programs that are balanced, researchbased, 

object-rich, and visually compelling–on topics that make a difference to the future of the world. 

The State has tasked the Burke to be responsible for the Washington State collections and to share the 

knowledge that makes them meaningful. These nationally ranked collections total more than 12.5 million 

objects in biology, geology, and anthropology and are actively used by students, scholars, scientists, 

museums, and community members throughout the state and around the globe. Through all of its varied 

programs and services, the Burke carries out its mission to create a better understanding of the world and 

our place in it. 

Currently, the museum’s ability to deliver its core services is hampered by the significant limitations of its 

50-year-old facility. The predesign project evaluated several potential solutions to renovate, transform, 

and expand the museum and address urgently needed climate controls, safety upgrades, electrical 

systems, and visitor amenities. 

Schedule – Anticipated project milestones: 

Predesign April 2009 – June 2010 

Design and Permit July 2011 – June 2013 

Construction October 2013 – March 2015 

Exhibit Installation April 2015 – September 2015 

Occupancy October 2015 

1-1 Executive Summary Draft 21 June 2010


2.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS 

Operational Needs 

University of Washington Mission 

The primary mission of the UW is the preservation, advancement, and dissemination of knowledge. The 

university preserves knowledge through its libraries and collections, its courses, and the scholarship of its 

faculty. It advances new knowledge through many forms of research, inquiry and discussion; and 

disseminates it through the classroom and the laboratory, scholarly exchanges, creative practice, 

international education, and public service. As one of the nation’s outstanding teaching and research 

institutions, the university is committed to maintaining an environment for objectivity and imaginative 

inquiry and for the original scholarship and research that ensure the production of new knowledge in the 

free exchange of facts, theories, and ideas. 

To promote their capacity to make humane and informed decisions, the university fosters an environment 

in which its students can develop mature and independent judgment and an appreciation of the range and 

diversity of human achievement. The university cultivates in its students both critical thinking and the 

effective articulation of that thinking. 

The university provides education, research, and service at a nationally competitive level. The renovation 

of Burke Museum will contribute significantly to the university’s ability to fulfill its mission, as well as the 

distinct mission of the Washington State Museum. Consistent with the University of Washington 

Restoration and Renewal Study, renovation and modernization of the UW’s existing facilities is crucial to 

the university’s ability to maintain competitive excellence in instruction, research and recruitment. 

Undertaking the full building renovation of the Burke Museum is considerably more cost-effective than 

implementing a series of smaller building renewal improvements, or building a new replacement facility. 

Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture 

The Burke Museum is dedicated to providing transformational experiences for its visitors in support of its 

vision to “to inspire people to value their connection to all life—and act accordingly.” It was established in 

1885 and declared the Washington State Museum in 1899. The museum is charged with caring for the 

Washington state collections of natural and cultural heritage (numbering over 12 million objects) and 

sharing the knowledge that makes them meaningful. The Burke has been co-located with the University of 

Washington campus for 125 years and in its current building since 1962. 

The Burke provides an important public gathering place where learners of all ages can come together to 

experience natural science and world cultures, and to explore the critical issues of our time. It does so 

through a broad range of public programs, exhibits, and research activities. Burke education programs 

span the museum’s disciplines and take place both on-site and across the state. School programs are 

customized to meet both student and teacher needs and include hands-on discovery tours, summer 

programs, outdoor environmental education, and educator workshops. Statewide services include the 

“Burkemobile,” teacher training, and “Burke in a Box,” the Northwest’s most extensive resource of portable 

teaching collections. 

Burke exhibits focus on topics that make a difference to the future of the world, including environmental 

sustainability and cultural understanding. The museum hosts traveling exhibits of international stature, 

develops thematic exhibits built around its own collections, and produces out-going traveling exhibits on 

topics such as global warming, coffee, earthquakes, and the fossils of Washington State. 

Currently, the museum’s ability to deliver its core services and meet the aspiration of its vision is severely 

hampered by the limitations of its 50-year-old facility. 

Adequacy of Space 

The current building configuration creates obstacles to this vision of leadership and knowledge due to its 

cramped and unplanned research office areas, out-of date-exhibit and collection storage spaces, and its 

aging infrastructure that is almost fifty years old. The existing facility requires modernization and 

updating in order for the Burke to successfully fulfill its mission and vision. Improvements would include: 

1) Adequate climate controls to protect and preserve the collections; 

2-1 Project Analysis 30 June 2010


2) Improved spatial quality, efficiency and accessibility of all exhibit, presentation, classroom, staff 

and office, research, and storage spaces; 

3) Elimination of deficiencies in building infrastructure, seismic resistance, life safety, security and 

accessibility; and 

4) The provision of better environmental quality through improved lighting, acoustics and 

environmental comfort. 

Explore Alternatives 

Three alternatives were explored. 

1. Modernize and Improve the Existing Building on the Existing Building Site. 

This option will completely renovate the existing building. It will involve demolishing the existing 

building down to its frame and exterior walls. The building structure will be seismically upgraded 

and interior walls rebuilt. 

2. Deferred Renewal/Maintenance Upgrade 

This option would make incremental improvements based on maintenance needs and the 

recommendations of the consolidated building audit performed by the University of Washington 

Campus Engineering in July of 2009. This audit included all major building systems and 

assessments covered all architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing 

components. This option would also presume incremental upgrades to meet modern program 

requirements. 

3. New Building on the Existing Building Site. 

This option would replace the existing building at the existing site location with a new building. 

The same program space allocations used for the existing building modernization would be 

applied to a new building. This option has a higher cost than modernizing the existing building. 

Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

Life Cycle Costing (LCC) is a quantitative analysis that estimates the initial ongoing costs of a proposed 

capital project solution over a particular period of time. LCC compares the total costs of alternative 

solutions by including both the initial cost of the project and the anticipated operating, maintenance, and 

future capital costs, which may accompany each solution. 

A key part of LCC is the use of present value analysis to account for the time value of money in long-term 

projects. Present value analysis is based upon the principle that money spent now is worth more than 

money spent in the future because of the opportunity to realize a return on current monies. When 

projects span multiple years, it is necessary to adjust costs that will be incurred in future periods to 

account for the time value of money. This ensures that all dollar amounts are stated on a same year basis 

when evaluating alternative facility solutions, thereby providing comparable costs. 

The major assumptions used in the LCC are: 

1. Discount Rate – A rate of 3.0% was used to discount all future year costs into common period 

(2006) dollars. 

2. Economic Life – The LCC covers a fifty-year period beginning with the year 2011. 

3. Initial Capital Costs – The initial capital costs have been estimated using OFM’s prescribed cost 

estimating procedures, including use of the Project Cost Estimate Worksheet Form C-100, an 

inflation of factor of 3.0% has been used to escalate construction to future years. 

4. Operations and Maintenance Costs – Estimates of annual operating and maintenance cost have 

been made based on historical costs on the University campus as described in Section 7: Facility 

Operations and Maintenance and provided by the University of Washington. 

5. Residual Value – Residual value at the end of economic life used in the LCC were estimated in 

future year dollars based on replacement cost less accumulated depreciation. It is assumed that 

new or renovated facilities would have a maximum useful life of 50 years. The LCC allows for 

periodic replacement of certain items more than once during the 50 year period. 



The following graphic shows the LCC comparison of the three alternatives. The detailed calculation 

spreadsheet is included in the Appendix. 

Selected Alternative 

Of the three options which were analyzed, only one met the requirements and budget of the Burke. 

Preferred Option – The preferred option to modernize and improve the existing museum stood out as the 

one alternative capable of meeting the needs of the museum, addressing the deficiencies of the existing 

structure, allowing for future growth of the collections and exhibits, and presenting the 

collections/research in a manner which is most desirable to the institution. 

1. Alternate 1 – Deferred Renewal/Maintenance Upgrade 

This option was rejected. This alternate costs more than the preferred option and falls well short 

of satisfying the needs or institutional vision of the Burke. Replacing one system after 

another over many years would require repeated surging of the collections and exhibits to 

other locations. This move and surge costs that are not included in the LLC and would 

add millions of dollars of cost. Repeated moves would cause extraordinary damage to 

fragile artifacts. 

2. Alternate 2 – New Building on the Existing Building Site. 

This option was rejected. A new building would significantly exceed the proposed project budget. 

Demolishing the existing building would also significantly increase environmental impacts from 

the increased energy of disposing of the existing building and the fabrication and transportation 

of new building materials. 



Scope and Project Description 

The project scope includes the demolition of the existing interior down to structure and the complete 

reconfiguration and remodeling of the building interior. This will include relocation of all building access 

points including the loading dock. Approximately 5,319 square feet of new building construction is 

anticipated in the preferred option. Specific seismic deficiencies in the existing structure will be addressed 

as well. 

The building envelope will be renewed to improve energy performance and occupant comfort, and prevent 

water infiltration. Mechanical, electrical, lighting, and communications systems will be replaced, as will 

other critical building components such as roofing, window systems, and doors. 

Site improvements will include landscape improvements with the addition of site parking to the north 

identified in the predesign as a desirable opportunity. 

Issues Identification 

The renovation will address structural, seismic, life safety, hazardous materials, accessibility and other 

code deficiencies as well as improve the building exterior envelope, ensure the preservation of the 

building, the safety of its occupants, and support cost-efficient operations. Program, building, design and 

site development requirements needed to meet the needs of the users were identified in the predesign 

inquiry, as were sustainability goals. The renovation provides an opportunity to redesign the interior 

program spaces to more efficiently and flexibly meet the needs of the Burke for modern research and 

public presentation. 

Prior Planning and History 

Over the past twenty years, a number of assessments have been made of The Burke Museum. These are 

briefly summarized as follows: 

April 2010 Philanthropic Funding Feasibility for the Burke Museum’s Capital Project 

An assessment of the feasibility of raising philanthropic dollars as part of the funding for a capital project 

to renovate, transform, and expand the museum (summary attached in Appendix). (The Collins Group) 

July 2009 University of Washington Consolidated Building Audit for the Burke Museum 

The audit reflects the status of existing building systems, components, and infrastructure. The report 

makes recommendations to consider when making improvements to the building. (UW Facilities Group) 

June 2009 Burke Museum Impact Planning Framework 

Institutional planning to align mission, vision, audiences, impacts, and strategies. (Randi Korn & 

Associates) 

June 2009 Burke Museum Collections Assessment Study 

A report on Burke Museum collection storage conditions as of June 2009. (Roxana Augusztiny, Burke 

Museum.) 

May 2009 Burke Museum Interpretive Prospectus 

A document to guide planning for the visitor experience. (Alice Parman, PhD.) 

2003 University of Washington Master Plan Seattle Campus 

Approved by the Seattle City Council in December of 2002 and by the Board of Regents in January 2003. 

The proposed project is consistent with the Master Plan. (UW Capital Project Office, Office of Planning & 

Budgeting, and others.) 

2003 Strategic Plan for Growth 

Summary document prepared for the State of Washington as a result of a two year “Governance and Siting 

Study” in preparation for expansion of the Burke Museum. (Cedar River Group and Schacht•Aslani 

Architects) 



2003 Institutional and Architectural Planning Study Appendix documents (see above) 

Documents include Structural, Mechanical and Electrical Reports and Building Code Review for the Burke. 

May 1998 The Burke Museum – An Expanded Natural History Museum for the Northwest 

Final report on the study of the potential of the Burke Museum to grow into a major cultural attraction. 

(Walter Schacht Architects and LORD Cultural Resources Planning and Management, Inc.) 

1997 Burke Museum Siting Analysis 

Traffic and Parking Study. 

October 1991 The University of Washington Earthquake Readiness Advisory Committee Report 

Established for seismic retrofitting if major capital facilities based on seismic condition studies damage 

potential and life safety hazard. (UW Earthquake Readiness Advisory Committee) 

Stakeholders 

Affected groups include UW students, faculty and staff as well as students, scholars, scientists, museums, 

agencies, organizations and citizens of the State of Washington and around the world through public 

service, education, research, and information programs. 

The UW stakeholders include the students, faculty and staff of the College of Arts and Sciences, College of 

the Environment, as well as the larger campus community. 

Project Description 

Agency Name: University of Washington 

Agency Code: 360 

Project Number: 20082850 

Project Title: Burke Museum Renovation 

Agency Contact: Colleen Pike 

Director, Capital Resource Planning, Office of Planning and Budgeting 

UW Tower, T-12, Room 406, Box 359445, Seattle, WA 98195 

206 685-9960 

206 543-0801 fax 

cpike@u.washington.edu 

The proposal is that the existing Burke Museum building be modernized and transformed to support its 

existing programs more effectively, as well as enhance Burke expansion opportunities for the future. The 

renovation project will be a modernization and expansion of a structure that has outdated and deficient 

systems and will support the Burke’s vision about the way the museum should interface with its audience, 

including the manner in which collections and research activities are presented to the public. 

The transformed Burke Museum will: 

1. Improve the accessibility, approach and entry to the museum. 

2. Improve visibility of the Burke to the campus and the public. 

3. Reflect the environmental sustainability vision of the Burke. 

4. Allow for departmental expansion and flexible planning in the future. 

5. Better serve the needs of the staff and the research/academic communities. 

6. Turn the museum “inside-out” by making the collection areas and research activities more visible 

to visitors through innovative exhibit design and programming. 

7. Vastly improve the stewardship of the Museum’s collections. 



This will be accomplished by: 

1. Relocating the main lobby of the museum to the south, shifting the approach and public entry to a 

more desirable side of the building. This relocation allows for a more visible and inviting sunlit 

entry court, accessible to the existing site parking, at the south side of the building. Unlike the 

current front door, this entry is directly accessible at grade and provides for a main public entry as 

well as a much improved staff/business entry. 

2. Relocating the loading dock and service entrance from their current locations, allowing for a more 

inviting and pedestrian friendly aspect to the west side of the building, where hundreds of 

students pass daily. 

3. Attaining a minimum Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold certification. 

4. Providing flexible, dynamic, and manageable exhibit spaces. The innovative “pathway exhibit” 

concept allows the public to be closer to the research and collections that exist there, and be 

inspired by the process and outcomes of the museum’s research activities. Integrated as part of 

the visitor experience at the museum, the exhibit galleries will be linked to the experience of 

walking through the building and seeing the inner workings of the facility. 

5. Providing dual-use circulation corridors via the Pathway exhibit, maximizing the use of building 

space. 

6. Anticipating the integration of space above high-ceilinged research and collections areas for 

display and interpretation of specimens and objects. 

7. Allowing for future expansion of research and exhibits through expansion to the north, south, 

east, or west. 

8. Anticipating more organized and deliberately planned research collections spaces where the use 

of compactor storage units can yield more efficient and safe storage of the Burke’s specimens. 

9. Providing more space allocation and better appointments for departmental areas, including lab 

and research spaces of different varieties. 

10. Provide for growth of departmental staff – growth which is impossible to accommodate in the 

current building because of space limitations. 

11. Adding an accessible multipurpose room to the facility for flexible use by the Education 

department and other programs. 

12. Introducing more daylighting to the occupants through the use of skylights at the central part of 

the building. 

13. Proposing exterior building skin treatments that will improve energy performance, enhance 

building envelope moisture and weather protection, allow for sun shading and refresh the exterior 

appearance. 

14. Adding a large new service elevator. 

15. Improving wayfinding within the facility. 

16. Providing a more appropriate and secure service access and registration sequence from the 

loading dock. 

17. Improving building acoustics and other environmental factors. 

All of these possibilities are hampered by the significant limitations of the Burke’s existing 50-year-old 

facility. The predesign study evaluated several potential solutions to renovate, transform, and expand the 

museum while addressing the urgent need for climate controls, safety upgrades, electrical systems, and 

visitor amenities. The remodeled and re-envisioned Burke will be a significantly more productive and 

efficient facility for the citizens of Washington and will transport all visitors to new worlds of 

understanding. 

Implementation Approach 

This project will be managed by the UW Capital Projects Office with a project manager and construction 

manager under the supervision of the Group Director. The project manager will manage the various 

design contracts required for this project. Other responsibilities include budget control and managing the 

technical reviews by the various university departments and committees. This project will proceed using a 

traditional design approach of Schematic Design, Design Development, Bidding, and Construction. The 

project will also use the GC/CM process to allow for contractor involvement during the design process. At 

the end of each phase of design, the architect will submit a cost estimate to assure the project is on 

budget. The GC/CM will also do an independent cost estimate of the project at the end of each phase. 



The team will then reconcile the two cost estimates. The University's engineering staff will conduct a 

review of the design documents to see that the design complies with the program and university 

standards. 

The UW Architectural Commission and the University Landscape Advisory Committee will advise on any 

exterior building changes required to the Burke Museum and the site area. These reviews will occur at the 

end of the Schematic Design Phase and Design Development Phase. The UW Board of Regents will review 

and approve the design and budget at the end of the Schematic Design phase and the Board of Regents 

will approve awarding the GC/CM contract for the construction work. 

During the construction phase, a UW construction manager will be assigned to coordinate the construction 

activities and have day-to-day responsibilities for managing the construction contract. 

Project Management 

The UW's Capital Projects Office (CPO) will manage the design and construction of this project. The 

Associate Vice President for Capital Projects is responsible for overall organization management. 

Project Managers organize and administer the work of outside design consultants and public works 

contractors. They follow projects all the way through construction and work closely with clients, project 

architects, designers and consultants. In addition, they work with CPO construction coordinators and 

contractors to ensure projects are on time and within budget. 

The CPO's professional staff includes architects, engineers, cost estimators, project accounting staff, 

interior designers, sustainability manager, a landscape architect, contract specialist, and an environmental 

planner. Technical review and approval of design and construction work are the responsibility of 

Engineering Services. This division of Facilities Services provides expertise on architectural, mechanical, 

structural, electrical, communications, utilities, asbestos, environmental, and commissioning issues. In 

addition, the departments of UW Information Technology (UWIT) and Environmental Health & Safety (EH&S) 

provide additional technical reviews to assure compliance with university technical and safety 

requirements. 

Method of Delivery 

The UW proposes to use the General Contractor/Construction Manager (GC/CM) method, as authorized by 

the State Legislature in Title 39.10 RCW, to accomplish this project in the most cost-effective manner. 

This project will require complex scheduling to minimize the time the occupants are moved out of the 

building. For details, see the attached schedule. Detailed coordination will be necessary to maintain the 

vehicular, service, and pedestrian access around this site, particularly on Memorial Way and the pedestrian 

paths around the Burke Museum. The GC/CM on the project team during the design phase will help the 

project team to make the most cost-effective decisions concerning the configuration of the construction 

staging area and methods of construction. The GC/CM will provide value engineering, constructability, 

cost estimating, and schedule development assistance during the design phase to minimize the potential 

for cost or schedule overrun. 

Schedule – Anticipated project milestones: 

Predesign April 2009 – June 2010 

Design and Permit July 2011 – June 2013 

Construction October 2013 – March 2015 

Exhibit Installation April 2015 – September 2015 

Occupancy October 2015 



3.0 PROGRAM ANALYSIS 

Assumptions 

Program information was gathered through detailed discussions with the staff and the Burke Building 

Committee, tours of the existing facilities including those located offsite, and from materials provided by 

the Burke. 

The museum is a two-story brick building with approximately 67,181 gross square feet. The goal of the 

Predesign Report is to assess the feasibility of undertaking a major expansion/improvement of the Burke 

Museum that will address the current limitations and shortcomings of the existing facilities. Pressing 

issues include: 

1) Inadequate climate controls to protect and preserve the collections; 

2) Unsatisfactory space and access for exhibit, presentation, classroom, research, and storage; 

3) Inadequate storage space to support the museum’s increasingly active creation of traveling 

exhibits. 

4) An aging and out-of-date building with deficiencies in infrastructure, seismic resistance, life 

safety, security and accessibility. 

5) A facility which does not conform to the Burke Museum’s vision to “inspire people to value their 

connection with all life—and act accordingly.” 

It is assumed that all current codes are applicable and that the existing building will be upgraded to 

current standards, including seismic, life safety, Americans with Disabilities Act, building and energy 

codes. In addition to state and city mandated codes, the University of Washington has internally 

mandated requirements that will be addressed. 

Existing Facilities 

The University of Washington Burke Museum was originally designed by James J.Chiarelli Architects and 

constructed in 1961. The building consists of a basement, first floor, second floor, second floor 

mezzanine, low roof and high roof levels. Interior floor additions and floor infills were done in 1963 and 

1990. The original design had an atrium in the center of the building which was infilled at the floor of the 

second level as part of the 1990 renovation. 

A report of the status of the existing building system components and infrastructure was performed by 

the University of Washington Campus Engineering in July of 2009. Descriptions and recommendations 

from that consolidated building audit are referenced in this report. This audit included all major building 

systems and assessments cover architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing components. 

A. Existing Civil Systems Narrative 

General 

The museum site is bounded by NE 45 th Street on the north Stevens Way on the south, 15 th Avenue NE on 

the west and Memorial Way NE on the east. The site slopes from north east to southwest with the high 

point at the northeast corner at approximately elevation 234 feet above sea level and the low point of the 

site at approximately elevation 196 feet above sea level. 

There are existing parking areas on the east and south sides of the existing building. The access to the 

parking is by a driveway connection at NE Stevens Way to Memorial Way NE. There is an existing drop-off 

on the east side of the building with two driveway connections to Memorial Way NE. 

There is an existing loading dock on the west side of the building that is accessed through the parking lot. 

Storm Drainage 

All building roof drains are collected around the building perimeter and directed to an existing 8 inch 

storm drain south of the building that is directed east to an existing storm drain line in Memorial Way NE. 

Through the university’s storm drainage system this runoff eventually reaches Lake Washington. Storm 

drainage runoff from the parking areas is directed to the south to a 10 inch storm drain line that was 

3-1 Program Analysis 30 June 2010


installed during the construction of the law school. This 10 inch storm drain connects to a City of Seattle 

15 inch storm drain in 15 th Avenue NE. Runoff in this storm drain line discharges to Portage Bay. 

Water 

The existing building is served with domestic water by an 8 inch water line that enters the building at the 

southeast corner. This water line connects to an existing 8 inch water line in Memorial Way NE. This 

water line also provides water for the fire service. 

Sanitary Sewer 

The existing sanitary sewer service discharges from the southeast corner of the existing building through 

a 6 inch line. This line connects to an existing 10 inch line in Memorial Way NE. 

B. Existing Architectural Building Condition Narrative 

Exterior Walls 

The exterior walls are brick veneer panels, vertical precast concrete panels and columns over a reinforced, 

cast-in-place concrete structural frame. Window frames/surrounds and decorative parapet elements are 

precast concrete. The caulk joints between the precast concrete elements and the brick panels are old and 

deteriorated. The mortar joints at the brick panels are in fair condition with some deterioration. 

At the south café side one precast concrete column has a spalled area with exposed reinforcing bars. The 

joint at the bottom of the precast concrete panels is deteriorated badly and is missing in places. Some 

precast concrete panels show spalled areas at the edges. The surrounding joints are hard mortar which 

does not allow expansion. 

Related site elements are cast in place walks and stairs with precast exposed aggregate concrete pavers at 

the café plaza. The south stairs to the entry platform have settled approximately 3 inches and some of 

the paved and paver areas have settled unevenly. 

Doors and Windows 

The entries consist of aluminum doors with full glass lites and are in good to fair condition. The other 

exterior service doors are painted hollow metal in good condition. The loading dock has two roll-up 

aluminum garage type doors in good condition. 

The windows original to the building are anodized aluminum with single glazing. Their physical condition 

is fair, however, with only single glazing, they are not energy efficient nor up to current energy code 

standards. 

The main entry is a bronze anodized storefront type system with insulated glazing. This system is in good 

condition. 

The clerestory windows over the central exhibit space are a bronze anodized storefront type system and 

are well weathered and energy inefficient. Their physical condition is poor. 

Roofing 

The main roof is an IRMA type roof with a paver assembly consisting of a thin cementitious layer bonded 

to foam insulation. The upper clearstory roof is a built-up assembly on the concrete deck. The upper roof 

has an aluminum coating. Both roofs were redone in 1985. The lower roof is in good condition due to the 

membrane being protected by the insulated pavers. The upper roof is in poor condition with the coating 

deteriorating and has several blisters throughout the roof surface. At places the parapet has had roofing 

membrane applied to the top to prevent leaks, probably at the joints. 

Floors and Floor Finishes 

Floors are exposed, sealed, cast-in-place concrete in the work areas of all floors. VCT over concrete exists 

at the offices. All floor finishes are in good condition. 

The exhibit areas are primarily carpet with terrazzo type tiles in the entries to the exhibit spaces. The 

entry lobby is terrazzo type tiles. All floor finishes are in good condition. 

Walls and Wall Finishes 



Walls are painted cast-in-place concrete, concrete block and/or GWB in the work and office areas of all 

floors. All wall finishes are in good condition. 

The exhibit and lobby walls are painted GWB in good condition. 

Walls in the café are antique carved wood panels in good condition. 

Ceilings and Ceiling Finishes 

The majority of the ceilings are exposed, painted, cast in place concrete structure. Ductwork, conduit and 

pipes are all exposed and painted. There are some occasional problems with leaks at the ducts from 

spilled liquids from the exhibition space above. The offices have suspended ACP ceilings. 

The main exhibit spaces are generally exposed, painted concrete structure with some accent sections of 

ceiling. The adjacent meeting room has a decorative metal and suspended ACP ceiling. 

Restrooms ceilings are painted GWB. 

Door Hardware 

All doors are painted solid core wood with mostly knob hardware and few with lever hardware. Stairway 

and secure storage room doors are painted hollow metal. Doors and hardware are in fair to good 

condition but universally need to be replaced to be code compliant. 

Vertical Transportation 

The existing elevator is a freight/passenger type with a capacity of 4,000 lbs. It was manufactured by 

Sound Elevator Co. and was installed in 1962 and was completely renovated in 2002. Condition is 

excellent. 

Accessibility 

The main building entry is accessible via a ramp. Elevator provides accessibility to all floors. The main 

entry floor public restroom is accessible, however it does not have lever hardware. The restrooms in the 

work areas on the other floors are not accessible. Because of the great limitations of space for storage, 

research and work functions of the museum, full accessibility is difficult to accomplish. The main exhibit 

areas are fully accessible and effort has been made to provide accessibility to all exhibits, interactive and 

passive. 

C. Existing Structural Narrative 

Building Description 

The building consists of a basement, first floor, first floor mezzanine, low roof and high roof levels. Floor 

additions and infills have been done in 1963 and 1990. 

The building is a founded on conventional spread footings and continuous strip footings that bear on a 

dense glacial till. The basement floor is a 4-inch thick concrete slab on grade. The basement walls are 10inches 

thick. The interior walls for the stair cores are 8-inch thick concrete walls. 

The lower floor framing or main floor is typically an 8-inch thick, mildly-reinforced, concrete flat slab with 

drop caps at the columns. The interior courtyard area is a 7-inch thick, depressed flat slab. 

The upper floor framing consists of precast/prestressed beams with an 8-inch thick, cast-in-place slab 

poured monolithically over the precast/prestressed beams. These beams span approximately 35 feet on 

the outside perimeter bay of the building and are spaced at 15 feet on-center. The interior bay framing 

between the original mezzanine floor opening and the precast/prestressed beams consists of cast-in-place 

beams spanning 15 feet. The original mezzanine opening was 45 feet by 45 feet located in the center of 

the building. 

The lower roof framing is framed similar to the upper floor framing scheme described above. The upper 

roof framing is the area over the original mezzanine opening to form a clerestory space that extends 

approximately 8 feet above the low roof. The upper roof is constructed of two-way slabs supported by 

grouted post-tensioned beams that are upset in order for the slab to be architecturally exposed for the 

ceiling. The slabs vary in thickness from 4-inches thick along the perimeter to 12-inch thick at support 

beams. 



The mezzanine opening infilled in 1990 consists of a 2.5-inch concrete topping over a 3-inch deep metal 

deck with composite, steel framed wide flange beams. Steel columns adjacent to the existing columns 

were provided to support the steel beams. 

The vertical support system consists of cast-in-place columns and walls as well as precast columns. The 

cast-in-place columns are typically between the basement and main floor. The precast columns are 

typically above the main floor and are connected to the pre-stressed beams. The southeast corner of the 

building has 6- and 8-inch precast walls. 

Lateral support for wind and earthquake loads is provided by the concrete roof and floor diaphragms that 

transfer the lateral load to the concrete shear walls in each direction in the building. 

Lateral Load Findings 

The following brief lateral load assessment is based on a Life Safety performance level, which is consistent 

with the requirements of most jurisdictions for buildings undergoing substantial alterations. Provisions 

contained in ASCE 31 and FEMA 356, guidelines for the seismic evaluation and rehabilitation of buildings, 

respectively, form the basis of this study, although the provisions have not been rigorously checked. 

The primary deficiencies identified in our evaluation consist of the following: 

1) The east-west shear walls at the main level are approximately 10% overstressed for the shear 

stress check. 

2) The precast wall connections are insufficient to resist uplift 

3) The connections of the precast beam to precast column are insufficient. 

4) The high roof clerestory resistance to lateral loads is insufficient through the column shear. 

In order to mitigate these deficiencies and to improve the building performance level to a Life Safety 

objective, the following building upgrades are recommended. Note that these upgrades are presented in 

an order concurrent with the above identified deficiencies. 

1) The renovation and addition for this project should address this deficiency in its design. The 

addition of shear walls in the existing space or added walls in the addition to the building could 

be utilized to augment the existing shearwall deficiencies. 

2) Supplemental steel angles could be anchored to the walls and floor to provide shear and uplift 

capacity at the base of the precast walls. 

3) Additional steel plates and anchor bolts should be provided to strengthen existing precast 

connections. 

4) The existing precast columns could be strengthened with steel plates attached with expansion 

anchors or bracing introduced between the clerestory and low roof. The new design may consider 

removal of this clerestory element which would eliminate this deficiency within the proposed 

design. 

D. Existing Building Mechanical Systems 

General 

The Burke Museum was designed and built in the early 1960’s and had some renovation work completed in 

1990. It should be noted that the building is not mechanically cooled and depends upon the outside air 

temperature for cooling. Therefore in the warm summer months the building becomes uncomfortable. In 

addition, chilled water from the campus system is not available due to the remote location of the building in 

relation to the campus chilled water system. Therefore any future mechanical cooling will need to be developed 

on site. 

Heating System 

The heating energy source is the campus low pressure steam system that supplies steam to the building through 

an underground tunnel system. The steam condensate is pumped back to the campus boiler plant. 

The steam is used to generate hot water as the primary heat source in the building using a steam to hot water 

convertor. The building is heated and ventilated by a large constant volume multi-zone system located in the 

basement. Hot water is circulated through the zone heating coils to provide zone control. These zones are large 

and do not provide good local zone control for the smaller individual spaces. 



It is recommended that this system be replaced with a heating and cooling system as required to meet the 

individual space requirements and meet the current Washington State Energy Codes. 

Controls 

The building is provided with a pneumatic control system. We recommend that when the building mechanical 

system is replaced, that a Direct Digital Control system be installed and connected to the campus management 

system. 

Plumbing 

The building is provided with a single source of water for fire protection and domestic use. The domestic water 

splits into three parts, one for the irrigation system and the other two for domestic use. The hot water and cold 

water piping is from the original installation which used galvanized piping. This has been reported to be in poor 

condition and should be replaced. Not all of the laboratory fixtures are separated from fixtures requiring potable 

water and therefore any future replacements should have separate water supply for the laboratories. 

The hot water for the building is generated by steam tube bundle fitted into a 300 gallon storage tank. This 

system is part of the original installation and should be replaced. 

The condition of the sanitary and storm water systems is unknown and will require inspection and replacement 

where necessary. 

Fire Protection 

The building is fully sprinklered and there are no record of any pipe failures. It is expected that the system 

would need to be modified to meet the requirements of any proposed room changes. The system will require 

that a new separate water source be provided from the street main in Memorial Way. 

E. Existing Electrical Systems Narrative 

NORMAL POWER SERVICE AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 

Primary Power Service 

The Burke is fed primary power from the UW campus 13.8 kV feeders WA-4 and WB-4. Primary power for 

the building is from a medium voltage switch in manhole NW7A. The switch and the 13.8kV primary cable 

to the building are less than 5 years old and are in good condition. 

Power Service Equipment 

The existing building power service equipment is a 500kVA, 1600A, 208/120V, three phase, 4 wire single 

ended substation located in the building main electrical room. The 500kVA transformer in this substation 

was replaced in 2005 and is in good condition. The substation switchboard is the original 1961 

equipment and so is decades beyond its normal thirty year useful life and should be replaced. 

Power Distribution System 

The substation switchboard distributes power to a system of branch panel boards located throughout the 

facility. Most of the branch panel boards are part of the original 1961 installation. These old panel 

boards are beyond their normal thirty year useful life, and need to be replaced. There are few available 

spare circuits in these older panels. 

There are several newer panel boards that were added during the 1990's and are in good condition. 

However, these newer panel boards are also very short on spare circuits. 

Panels S1 and T1 on the main level were added during the temporary gallery remodel project in 2005 and 

are in good condition. Between them, these two panel boards have approximately forty spare circuits, that 

could be readily used to feed loads on the main floor. 

Wiring Method 

Existing power feeders and branch circuits are in metal EMT and RGS conduit. 



EMERGENCY POWER SYSTEM 

Emergency power for egress lighting, exit signs and the fire alarm system is provided by a 20kVA battery 

inverter unit feeding Panel X. Both the inverter unit and Panel X are located in the main electrical room 

and appear to be in good condition. While this system is adequate for the existing loads, it is less useful 

for a remodel or addition because of its limited power capacity and ongoing battery maintenance issues. 

Primary power from the UW campus 2.4kV emergency power distribution system is available in manhole 

NW7A and could be routed to the Burke building via the existing utility tunnel system. While there is 

existing tap equipment in nearby manhole NW7, it is an older type no longer used on the UW campus; so 

tapping into the campus emergency power system would involve adding new dead break elbow tap 

equipment in manhole NW7A. University of Washington Plant Engineering has confirmed that there is 

enough spare capacity in the existing UW emergency power system for the code required emergency 

loads, such as egress lighting, in a Burke Museum remodel/addition. However, there is not enough 

capacity for optional loads, such gallery environmental HVAC, to be added to the UW campus system. 

LIGHTING SYSTEM 

General Interior Lighting 

The existing general lighting is fluorescent, a mixture of recessed and surface mounted, lensed and 

louvered fixtures. In the gallery areas, the lighting is by suspended lighting track. A few newer 

fluorescent flood lights have been added to light feature walls. But most of the existing lighting appears 

to be the original 1961 fixtures, though the original magnetic fluorescent ballasts have been replaced by 

electronic ballasts to increase energy efficiency. In general, the existing light fixtures are old with parts 

increasingly hard to obtain. 

The temporary gallery, remodeled with all new lighting in 2005, has a system of suspended track lighting. 

It also includes a separate system of ceiling mounted compact fluorescent work lights. All of these lights 

are in good condition. 

Interior Lighting Control 

Throughout the building, with the exception of the track lighting in the exhibit galleries, the interior 

lighting is controlled by local switching. Each circuit of track lighting in the remodeled temporary gallery 

is controlled by an individual wall box dimmer. The track lighting in all of the other galleries is controlled 

by switching the circuit breakers on and off in the panel boards. There is no automatic lighting control 

anywhere in the building, as is required by current energy code. 

Exterior Lighting 

Building mounted exterior lighting includes surface mounted metal halide fixtures above the east door 

and flush mounted metal halide fixtures in the loading dock ceiling, HID floodlights in the high exterior 

ceiling area at the north and south sides of the building and step lights on the southeast stairs. These are 

all old and near the end of their useful life. 

There is also a number of pedestrian pole lights around the Burke Museum that are fed and controlled 

from the building. 

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 

The existing fire alarm system is a Simplex 4100 hard wired, zoned system dating to 1990. The system 

includes manual pull stations at exit doors and at stairways, sprinkler water monitoring devices, smoke 

detectors at smoke doors and in elevator lobbies and speaker/strobes throughout the public areas. The 

strobe density does not meet current code and strobes would need to be added for a remodel/addition. 

While this older non-addressable type of fire alarm system still meets code and could be expanded to meet 

the needs of a remodel or addition, it is obsolescent since addressable, analog digital fire alarm systems 

have become standard in the industry. Parts are still available but this model of fire alarm system has 

been phased out by the manufacturer. 











Space Needs Assessment 

Program Development Methodology 

The program reflects adjustments in assignable square footages in response to the need to provide more 

functional spaces for use by the staff, to meet the requirements of current codes, and to provide adequate 

and up-to-date ancillary support spaces. 

The functional program is based upon discussions with users and staff currently working in the Burke 

Museum as well as survey/program allocation materials provided by the Burke. 

The Facilities Evaluation and Planning Guide (revised October 1994) was used as a reference document 

during the predesign study. However, the sizes needed for office and individual work spaces for research 

department and administration offices were determined by the Burke. Favoring more staff working in 

efficient workstations and benchmarking these square footage allocations to their current workstations, 

staff workstations are programmed with smaller ASF than what is suggested in the FEPG guidelines. 

Functional Program Areas 

Exhibits 

The Burke Museum features changing and longer-term exhibits for the general public that explore 

subjects ranging from current research and recent discoveries in natural history, traditional and 

contemporary cultural arts, and that shed light on the pressing issues of our time. Included in the exhibit 

category is the “Pathway Exhibit”, which allows the public to circulate through the Burke and have direct, 

visual access to the core collection and research areas of the museum, revealing both the vastness of the 

collections and the diversity of research being conducted “behind the scenes.” Special overlook areas, wall 

niches, and other interpretive opportunities will highlight the findings of the research and tie into larger 

big ideas being explored throughout the museum. Exhibit support spaces include shops for design, 

fabrication, preparation and repair of exhibits as well as graphic design/finishing and office spaces. 

Education 

Organized visits by groups of children and adults (up to 300 per day) constitute a large part of the Burke’s 

on-site business. These tours include: hands-on discovery tours, guided tours, and self-guided tours that 

take place primarily in the galleries, with occasional pullout activities in a nearby multipurpose room. The 

group visitor experience will improve significantly in the new facility, with closer visual and physical access 

to the museum’s collections and inner workings. Other education and public programs affecting the use 

of the facility include lectures, films, cultural performances, summer programs, “Burke in a Box” traveling 

resources, and educator workshops/events. 

Office and Administration 

Office and administration spaces in support of the institution and the facility are housed in the building. 

Additionally, office space related to the research is located within individual research divisions. 

Research and Collections 

The Burke’s collections preserve an irreplaceable record of the natural history and cultural heritage of 

Washington State and beyond. The location of the Burke on the University of Washington campus signals 

the core role that research, and the generation of new knowledge, has played in the museum’s past and 

will continue to play in its future. Over its 125-year history, the museum has developed internationally 

significant collections in anthropology, geology, and biology. Its holdings have increased ten-fold since 

moving to its current building in 1962. In addition to field research, collecting, and generous gifts from 

the public, the Burke’s collections have grown significantly with the acquisition of materials from other 

campus units, including the Herbarium in 2002 and the fish collection in 2007—bringing the total number 

of objects and specimens cared for by the Burke to over 12.5 million. 

The Burke’s curators have joint appointments in UW academic departments and have made significant 

contributions to research in their respective fields with collections-based research. University of 

Washington faculty, students, and researchers use the Burke’s collections, as do researchers, scholars, and 

enthusiasts from throughout the world. The collections also provide the foundation for the museum’s 

public programs, including exhibits, K-12 education, and a full spectrum of lifelong learning programs 

designed for the engagement of families and the general public. The collections are accessed and used on- 



site, are loaned to other institutions, and used in a broad range of outreach programs. Indigenous and 

ethnic community members also access, study, and use the museum’s collections for their own purposes. 

Descriptions of Areas of Research and Collection 

ANTHROPOLOGY 

The Burke’s Anthropology Division includes collections of both archaeology and ethnology. Archaeology is 

the scientific study of how people lived in the past through the objects they left behind. Ethnology focuses 

on the cultural heritage of living cultures and the Burke’s collections focus on the Americas, the Pacific 

Islands, and Asia. 

Archaeology 

The Burke’s archaeology collections include more than one million objects from around the world, with a 

focus on cultural materials from the Pacific Rim (the area surrounding the Pacific Ocean and the islands 

within). It is best known for materials from the Lower Columbia River and the Puget Sound Region of 

Washington State. Included are objects made from stone, bone, ceramic, wood, and ivory. Many of the 

archeological artifacts are held in-trust for public agencies to better promote research and access to these 

collections. 

Ethnology 

The Burke’s ethnology collections are world-renowned. Numbering over 42,000 objects and more than 

50,000 archival records, the collections focus on the cultures of the Pacific Rim. The Northwest Coast 

ethnographic collection is the fifth largest in the United States, with approximately 10,000 items and 

includes the important early Swan, Eells, Emmons, and Waters collections, as well as the Blackman-Hall and 

Ottenberg contemporary silkscreen print collections, and the Steinman contemporary Northwest Coast 

sculpture collection. 

The Alaskan Arctic collection consists of 6,500-pieces, including basketry, kayaks, tools, and 

contemporary carvings. Additional collections of the Western Sub-arctic, Plateau, Plains, Great Lakes, and 

Southwest cultures includes baskets, beadwork, parfleches, weavings, and pottery. The Native North 

American basketry collection numbers over 5,200 pieces. Pacific Rim collections from throughout Asia and 

the Pacific Islands include nearly 15,000 items such as kava bowls, porcelain, dance masks, and samurai 

armor. 

The Northwest Coast image research database is a major highlight of the division and includes images of 

Northwest Coast art from 200 museums and private collections, Northwest Coast silver jewelry, and 

photographs of Northwest Coast totem poles, as well as historical Northwest Coast photographs. The Bill 

Holm Center for the Study of Northwest Coast Art was established in 2003 to become a globally accessible 

learning center at the Burke Museum. It promotes scholarly research on Northwest Coast Art and is 

dedicated to increasing both Native and public access to the museum’s research resources. 

BIOLOGY 

The museum’s biology collections contain a large number of unique “type specimens”—the initial 

described specimen to which other collections refer. The ornithology (birds), genetic resources, and 

Herbarium collections are particularly well known, and the recently acquired fish collection of over 7 

million specimens serves as a databank for research and species identification by scientists around the 

world. 

Genetic Resources 

The Burke has been saving tissue specimens from birds and mammals for use in molecular research since 

1986. This collection is one of the largest of its type in the world, with tissues from more than 33,000 

birds and 7,000 mammals. 

The Genetic Resource Collection (GRC) is a "library" of biodiversity—and one of the most important in the 

world for birds. The Burke's GRC and the few others like it are the only places where tissues of a wide 

variety of animals are being systematically collected and stored in archival conditions for future research: 

they contain frozen tissues from thousands of species that would otherwise not be available to scientists. 

The importance of such collections is increasing rapidly as habitats and organisms face destructive 



pressure in the wild. The Burke GRC loans sub-samples of its tissues to researchers for molecular studies, 

which may involve analysis of DNA, RNA, proteins, or isotopes. 

Herpetology (reptiles and amphibians) 

Washington is home to 25 species of reptiles and 27 species of amphibians, some found nowhere else in 

the world. The herpetological collection at the Burke Museum contains 4,200 specimens of amphibians 

and reptiles, primarily from the Pacific Northwest; it is particularly strong in amphibians and garter snakes 

from this area. 

The more than 2,200 specimens in the catalogued collection are mostly forest-dwelling amphibians from 

Western Washington obtained during wildlife studies in the 1980s and early 1990s. About half the 

uncatalogued material is garter snakes collected by William Hebard during the mid-1900s. The collection 

consists largely of alcohol-reserved specimens with a small number of photographs and skeletons. The 

Burke has recently hired a new curator of genetic resources and herpetologist and the collection will 

grown significantly after his arrival. 

Ornithology (birds) 

The Burke’s ornithological collections are relatively modern, with more than 85% of the specimens 

acquired in the past 20 years. The Burke maintains a comprehensive collection of birds from the Pacific 

Northwest, North America, and many other parts of the world. These bird specimens are used for 

teaching, research, and art. The Burke is particularly known for its special collections such as spread wings 

(the largest such collection in the world) and bird tissues (the world's second largest collection). 

Mammalogy (mammals) 

The Burke’s mammal collection consists of 47,000 individual mammals represented by 78,000 specimens 

and includes 70 species of carnivores, 140 bat species, 262 rodent species, 38 primate species, and 37 

marine mammal species. The oldest specimens in the collection date from the end of the nineteenth 

century. 

The mammalogy program develops and maintains its collection and trains students in research that is 

based on the collection. The Burke collection ranks as the 9th-largest university collection in North 

America and the 18th-largest of all mammal collections in the Western Hemisphere. Most specimens are 

from Washington and the Pacific Northwest; South America, Asia, Africa, Australia, and Europe are also 

represented. 

GEOLOGY 

The Burke's geology collection contain more than 3 million specimens and is primarily focused on 

paleontology. The museum also holds a minerals and gems collection, which is one of the finest on the 

Pacific Coast, containing specimens of every major chemical group. It is particularly rich in silicates, 

carbonates, halides, and sulfides. 

Paleontology 

The Burke’s paleontological collections contain more than 3 million specimens of fossil invertebrates, 

vertebrates, plants, single-celled protists, trace fossils, and modern mollusks. Research focuses on a wide 

diversity of topics that involve studies in biological evolution and in changes in climate over geologic time 

spans. Field collecting areas are spread across the world from the Pacific Northwest to central Africa, South 

America, and Antarctica. The Paleontology Division is active in community outreach and public programs 

including: Dinosaur Day (the museum’s most popular annual family event), teacher training, fossil tours, 

and more. The collections provide the main reference materials for undergraduate student instruction and 

graduate student research in paleontology at the University of Washington. 

Vertebrate Paleontogy 

This collection includes 43,000 specimens of fossil mammals, birds, dinosaurs, reptiles, amphibians, and 

fishes. 

Marine Vertebrates 

The Burke has a rapidly growing collection of scientifically important fossil marine vertebrates from the 

Pacific Northwest. Most of the fossils are the bones of a wide variety of marine mammals from the period 

25-5 million years ago. These include the fossil bones of whales, seals and sea lions (pinnipeds), from an 



extinct family of marine, quadripedal herbivores (desmostylians), large penguin-like birds (plotopterids) 

and an unusual bear-like animal that ate clams and snails (Kolponomus). 

Invertebrates and Microfossils 

The invertebrate and microfossil collections number over 2.5 million specimens and dates back to the 

founding of the museum in 1885. Included are fossils from pre-Cambrian to postglacial Holocene in age, 

with emphasis in materials from the Pacific Northwest. About half of the invertebrate paleontology 

collections are mollusks (clams, snails, ammonites and nautiloids) from the Cretaceous and Tertiary of 

western North American and Pacific Rim. Aside from the extensive Charles E. Weaver collection of 

Mesozoic South American material, there are also significant collections from western Europe, and 

southern and eastern North America. 

The microfossil collections, consisting primarily of Foraminifera, comprise approximately 60,000 

catalogued specimens, and total over 1 million specimens. As with the macrofossils, the bulk of the 

collection is the Cenozoic western North America, however, sizable Gulf Coast and western European 

segments lend worldwide representation. 

Plant and Insect Fossils 

The Burke’s fossil plant collections are the second-largest West Coast assemblage of fossil flowers, plants, 

and woods. The Eocene fossil plants, fish, and insect collections from Republic, Washington, are world 

famous and include many type specimens. 

Space Requirements 

Program 

The gross square footage (GSF) of the existing Burke Museum facility is 67,245 square feet. The Burke 

Museum programs use 48,525 assignable square feet (ASF). Departments within the building include 

Archaeology, Ethnology, Biology, Geology, Registrar, Museum Administration, Education, Public Programs 

and Exhibits. In addition, shared public amenities include a lobby, café, small store, a multipurpose room, 

as well as support services such as a reception desk and public restrooms. 

The principal uses of the space building are as exhibit space, lab and research space, office space, and 

classroom/meeting functions. There are a number of research laboratories and some of these lab spaces 

are used for teaching, though they are not teaching labs per se. 

In the new program, the total assigned square footage is relatively unchanged, but significantly, a 

reduction to the net assignable square footage of permanent exhibit space was made in the new program. 

This adjustment was a reflection of: 

1) A need to limit the size of the new project in order to meet budget goals; and 

2) An exhibit concept supported by the museum and the design team which engenders a more direct 

connection between the research work performed by the Burke staff, and the public. 

The assignable square footage for Collections Storage also was reduced from the existing allocations in 

anticipation of more efficient systems for the storage of collections (compactor type), the utilization of 

“airspace” above for the display of some collections objects, and the exportation of some artifacts to 

offsite storage facilities. 

Comparison of Net to Gross Area – Existing and Proposed 

The gross square footage (GSF) of the existing Burke Museum facility is 67,245 square feet. The Burke 

Museum programs currently use 48,525 assignable square feet (ASF). 

The gross square footage of the proposed new project is 70,319 square feet. The Burke Museum 

programs use 48,450 assignable square feet. 



The changes in the proportion of ASF to GSF results in a reduction of net-to-gross ratio from 72% to 69%. 

Both ratios indicate a high ratio percentage. The 72% figure for the existing facility can be attributed to: 

1) Large programmed spaces such as the Lobby and the public Exhibit rooms, which are identified as 

assigned square footage but which contain significant circulation area; and 

2) Accretive and unplanned growth over many years of the research and office spaces which has 

shrunk down the amount of circulation and ancillary supports spaces to practical minimums. 

Storage and service spaces have literally been converted to office space wherever possible. The 

staff and equipment are packed into the building. 

In the proposed new scheme, the reduction in efficiency reflected by a net-to-gross ratio of 69% appears to 

occur for a number of reasons: 

1) The provision of more generous public and private circulation corridors. 

2) The provision of additional accessible entries, vertical circulation and means of egress. 

3) The provision of adequate and accessible restrooms. 

4) The accommodation of expanded IT infrastructure such as communication/MDF and AV rooms. 

However, the utilization of space, as well as the user’s experience in the building, will be much improved 

in the new building due to: 

1) A proportionally lesser programmed space allocation for collections storage because of the 

presumption of the future use of high-efficiency storage systems such as compactors and; 

2) Much more efficient planning of office, lab, and storage spaces throughout the building; 

3) Less large scale exhibit space; and 

4) The integration of the “Exhibit Pathway” which eliminates redundancy of private and public 

circulation. 

Department 

Existing Proposed 

Program 

(SF) 

Program (SF) 

ANTHROPOLOGY 8,769 10,705 

BIOLOGY DIVISION 8,932 9,125 

GEOLOGY DIVISION 7,011 6,165 

REGISTRAR 830 945 

MUSEUM ADMINISTRATION 2,364 3,545 

EDUCATION & PUBLIC PROGRAMS 755 1,450 

EXHIBITS FABRICATION 

SHARED PUBLIC AMENITIES & 

1,285 2,260 

SUPPORT 6,235 6,490 

EXHIBIT SPACES 12,344 7,765 

Subtotal Building Area (ASF) 48,525 48,450 

BUILDING SERVICES 18,720 21,869 

TOTAL BUILDING AREA (GSF) 67,245 70,319 

Building Efficiency (Net/ Gross) 72% 69% 

Detailed Numeric Program 

Division Description/Room Type Quantity 

Anthropology Division 

Area 

(sf) 



Archaeology 

Laboratory Space 1 300 

Offices 

Curator (140 sf) 1 140 

Collections Manager (80 sf) 1 80 

NAGPRA Coordinator (80 sf) 1 80 

Workstations (50 sf ea) 3 150 

Conference Space with Library Storage 1 200 

Internal circulation factor 1 65 

Collections Storage 

Archaeology Collections 1 2,298 

Collections Work Areas (50 sf ea) 3 150 

Archaeology Collections Sub-Total 2,298 

Growth in Archaelogy Collections 437 

Archaeology Collections Total 2,735 

Archaeology Sub-Total 3,900 

Ethnology 

Laboratory Space 1 300 


Curators (140 sf ea) 3 420 

Collections Manager (80 sf ea) 3 240 

Workstation(s) (50 sf ea) 9 450 



Collections Storage 

Ethnology Collections 1 4214 

Large artifacts currently in Room 100P/L 

Artifacts on display w/out reserved storage 1 0 

Collections Work Areas (50 sf) 9 450 

Ethnology Collections Sub-Total 4,214 

Growth in Ethnology Collections 400 

Ethnology Collections Total 4,614 

Ethnology Sub-Total 6,805 

Anthropology Sub-Total 10,705 



Biology Division 

Laboratory Space 

Biology Prep Lab (300 sf ea) 3 900 

Genetics Prep Lab (300 sf) 1 300 

Beetle Colony 1 80 



Collections Manager(s) (80 sf ea) 4 320 




Biology Collections 

Birds Collections 1 1,588 

Mammals Collections(not inc. cold room) 1 1,402 

Invertebrates Collections 1 321 

Genetic Resources Collections 1 172 

Herpetology SCollections+ Short-term Fish 

Holding Space 1 400 

Short-term Herbarium Collection Holding 

Space 1 150 

Cold Room 1 500 

Walk-in Freezer 1 200 

minus-80 Freezers (5 plus one future) 1 200 

Freestanding & Suspended 1 0 


Biology Collections Storage Sub-Total 3,883 

Growth in Biology Collections 464 

Biology Collections Total 4,347 

Biology Sub-Total 9,125 

Geology Division 

Laboratory Space 

Fossil Prep Labs (Dirty) 300 

Fossil Prep Lab (Clean) 300 

Fossil Prep Chemical Stripping Lab 300 



Collection Manager(s) (80 sf ea) 3 240 

Fossil Preparator (160 sf ea) 2 320 

Workstations(s) (50 sf ea) 9 450 



Geology Collections 

Geology Collections 1 2708 

Geology specimens on display w/out 

reserved storage 1 


Geology Collections Storage Sub-Total 2708 

10% Growth in Geology Collections 314 

Geology Collections Total 3,022 

Geology Sub-Total 6,165 



Registrar's Office 

Registrar (140 sf) 1 140 

Managers/Coordinators (80 sf ea) 2 160 


Receiving Office (by loading & receiving) 1 140 

Records & Collections Storage 1 180 

Object Prep area 1 140 


Registrar's Sub-Total 945 

Museum Administration 

Director (140 sf) 1 140 

Director's Assistant (80 sf) 1 80 

Associate Director (140 sf) 1 140 

Waiting Area 1 50 

Workstation (50 sf) 1 50 

Director's Conference Area (seats 6+) 1 150 


Directors Total 665 

Development & Membership 

Director of Development (140 sf) 1 140 

Associates/Mgrs (80 sf ea) 3 240 


Records Storage 1 50 


Conference Area (seats 6) 1 150 

Development and Membership Total 780 

Communications 

Director of Communications (140 sf) 1 140 

Managers (80 sf ea) 3 240 



Conference Area (seats 6) 1 Shared 

Communications Total 630 

Operations 

Associate Director of Operations (140 sf) 1 140 

Human Resources (140 sf) 1 140 

Finance (140 sf) 1 140 

Computer Specialist (80 sf) 1 80 

Computer Storage Area (80 sf) 1 80 

Visitor Services (80 sf) 1 80 

Fiscal Specialist(s) (50 sf ea) 3 150 

Operations Manager(s) + Security (1 office) 1 250 

Security Room 1 140 



Operations Total 1,470 

Museum Administration Sub-Total 3,545 



Education & Public Programs 

Education & Public Programs Office 

Education Director (140 sf) 1 140 

Managers (80 sf ea) 3 240 

Workstations (coords & assistants) (50 sf 

ea) 7 350 

Docent Space (80 sf) 1 80 

Burke Educational Outreach Box Storage 1 150 

Burke Box Assembly & Instruction Area 1 140 

Supplies Room 1 100 



Education & Public Programs Sub-Total 1,450 

Exhibits 

Exhibits Office & Shops 

Design (140 sf) 1 140 

Preparation (80 sf ea) 2 160 


"Dirty" Fabrication Shop 1 650 

"Clean" Fabrication Shop 1 1160 

Exhibits Sub-Total 2,260 

Shared Public Amenities & Support Services 

Lobby 

Lobby 1 2100 

Admission Desk 1 Included 

Entry Foyer (Staff/ Business Entry) 1 425 

Coat & Bag Storage 1 100 

Lobby Total 2,200 

Café 

Café - tables and chairs in the lobby - 

included in lobby 

Prep Kitchen + Washroom (See Multipurpose 

1 0 

Room) 1 0 

Café Admin/Storage 1 50 

Café Total 

Store 

50 

Store 1 0 

Office (80 sf) 1 80 

Stock Room 1 100 

Store Total 

Multi Purpose (Burke) Room 

180 

Main Room 1 1100 

incl 

AV Support Closet 1 

above 

Chair/Table Storage 1 

incl 

above 

Kitchen prep 1 250 

Multipurpose Room Total 

Support Services 

1,100 

Reception Desk 1 150 

Classroom 1 875 

Multi-Purpose Room w/Storage 1 590 

Employee Lounge & Lunch Room 1 230 

Copy/Work/Mail Room 1 335 

Conference Room 1 300 

Quarantine Area 150 



Shared Support Space 330 

Support Services Total 2,960 

Shared Public Amenities & Support 

Services Sub-Total 6,490 

Exhibit Spaces 

Exhibits 

Permanent exhibits 1 4,000 

Temporary exhibits 1 3,500 

Exhibit Space Sub-Total 7,765 

Net Program Sub-Total 48,450 

Building Services 

Circulation 

Corridors 3,500 

Pathway Exhibit 1 4,185 

Stairs 1,280 

Freight Elevator 615 

Passenger Elevator 520 

Loading/Staging Area 1 520 

Restrooms 

Men's Restrooms 645 

Women's Restrooms 645 

Showers 

incl 

above 

Building Systems 

Mechanical 3,450 

Electrical 855 

Shafts 250 

Misc. Structure 150 

Interior Partitions/Walls 4794 

Elevator Machine Room 100 

Server Room 200 

Telecommunication/ Audio Visual Room 160 

Circulation, 

Restrooms, 

Building 

Systems 

Total 21,869 

Program Relationships 

Total 

Gross 

Square 

Footage 70,319 

An understanding of the functions within the various departments and the relationships between 

disciplines, and the adjacency needs of the various activities was developed through programming 

meetings and observations made by the design team and Building Committee during the Predesign effort. 

The following Program Diagram illustrates these relationships. 





Future Requirements and Flexibility 

The proposed option arranges the program space flexibly to allow for cost effective expansion over time. 

Codes and Regulations 

State and Local Building Codes: 

University of Washington Master Plan, Seattle Campus, January 2003 

Seattle Building Code – 2006 Seattle Building Code 

Accessibility Standards – ICC/ANSI A117.1 – 1998 Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities 

Seattle Fire Code 

Uniform Plumbing Code – as adopted by the City of Seattle 

Americans with Disability Act 

City of Seattle Stormwater Code 

City of Seattle Grading Code 

Standards: 

FEPG – Facilities Evaluation and Planning Guide, 1994 

FICM - Post Secondary Education Facilities Inventory and Classification Manual: 2006 Edition. 

NFPA 13 – Installation of Sprinkler Systems 

NFPA 14 – Standpipes and Hose Systems 

Sustainability/Green Building Requirements: 

State of Washington RCW 39.25D – High Performance Building 

University of Washington Facilities Services Design Guide 

Anticipated Occupancies: A-3, B, E and S 

Sustainability and Energy Utilization 

The University of Washington supports a sustainable approach to building and is likely to take advantage 

of various utility rebate programs, including energy rebate programs through Seattle City Light, Seattle 

City Light’s green power program, and water rebates from the Seattle Public Utilities. 

A sustainability workshop was held for the project. Workshop participants included members of the 

Building Committee, the Olson Kundig design team, Katrina Morgan and Katie Oman (Fermata 

Sustainability Consulting), Allan Montpellier (WSP Flack + Kurtz, mechanical engineers), and Clara Simon 

(sustainability Manager, UW CPO). While it is acknowledged by the design team that over the timeframe of 

the project, that the benchmarks for sustainability will change and evolve, the message received at all 

levels is that a new Burke project needs to be as forward thinking as possible. It was also stated that, as 

an institution focused on education about natural history, the Burke wishes to create opportunities to 

educate on the subject as well. Committed staff at the Burke have formed an internal sustainable action 

committee and could be expected to advocate and maintain future sustainable initiatives. Ultimately, the 

decision to reuse and responsibly renovate the existing structure has been noted by all project 

participants as a sustainable act in and of itself. 

A project goal which should be considered is the 2030 Challenge which for buildings completed in or 

around 2015, requires a reduction in building energy usage of 70% over existing building stock of similar 

type. This goal may be possible to achieve with significant upgrades to the exterior envelope to improve 

thermal efficiency and control solar heat gains, utilization of air source heat pumps coupled with a lowtemperature 

distribution system, heat recovery from lab exhaust to pre-heat ventilation, active chilled 

beams in labs, high-efficiency lighting systems coupled with daylighting controls and other building 

efficiency measures. This project has not mandated specific energy goals except as-needed to meet a 

LEED target, but the 2030 Challenge can provide a good benchmark for the design and aligns with the 

Burke’s desire for a highly-energy-efficient building. 

The design team met with the Burke Board to discuss, among other things, the Board’s thinking about 

conformance to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. The board made clear 

that sustainability is an important mission of the Burke and that the project should strive for a LEED 



Platinum level of certification. Balancing budget parameters with a desire for a progressive sustainability 

agenda, LEED Gold is a minimum certification level presumed for the project, with LEED Platinum being a 

goal to be assessed during design phases. Following are assumptions of the givens, and known 

approaches/strategies that could be anticipated for a LEED Gold or Platinum certification. 

Sustainable Site Strategies 

The Burke Museum is located in a high-density urban locale with access to public transportation and 

amenities. A native landscape palette that is formulated to use low-water will be specified. Bicycle parking 

and shower facilities are proposed. The exterior site lighting will have a directional quality and will meet 

LEED dark sky requirements. 

Water Efficiency Measures 

The replacement of the existing plumbing system will allow for various strategies and specifications to 

ensure water efficiency. High efficiency fixtures such as low-flow urinals, dual flush toilets and low flow 

shower heads will be considered. Low flow irrigation, or no irrigation, will be implemented in newly 

landscaped areas. 

Energy and Atmosphere 

The renovation of the Burke Museum provides the opportunity to provide an enhanced working 

environment that also achieves high energy performance. The addition of wall insulation and improved 

glazing will reduce heating and cooling requirements as well as the size of mechanical systems. 

Mechanical systems include heat recovery chillers that produce both heating and chilled water to serve the 

building, a phase change thermal storage system that is charged nightly using evaporative coolers, active 

chilled beams in lab spaces and exhaust air heat recovery. This system provides low temperature heating 

and high temperature cooling hydronically to the majority of work spaces, decoupled from ventilation, 

which is recognized as the most efficient strategy for HVAC. Additionally, highly efficient lighting, 

daylighting controls, and enhanced commissioning and on-going energy metering will contribute to the 

achievement of a high performance building aimed at reducing energy use and associated operating costs 

while helping the University to meet its long term carbon reduction goals. 

Materials and Resources 

New materials specified for the proposed project will be assessed based on their durability, 

maintainability, local availability, responsible procurement, recyclability and/or high recycled content. 

Existing building elements will be surveyed for their potential to be repurposed. Low VOC materials with 

good acoustic qualities will be used to enhance the interior environment. Building spaces should be 

designed to minimize intense material use and maximize ease of recycling. 

Environmental Quality 

Thermal comfort and high air quality for occupants are key project goals. Removal of any pollutant 

sources and space arrangements that allow for good air flow and access to daylight all help improve the 

health and productivity of users. Appropriate system choices to provide safe lab environments and 

protection of museum collections are planned, with high levels of filtration providing an added benefit to 

researchers. The University employs green housekeeping techniques that help maintain proper air quality. 

Walk-off mats will be incorporated to reduce exterior pollutants brought into the building. Specifications 

for coatings, adhesives, engineered wood products, finish materials, and furnishings will limit the 

presence of material components which degrade air quality. A flush-out period to allow interior products 

and materials to off gas will be considered. Mechanical heat recovery ventilation systems will provide 

outdoor fresh air throughout the year. Isolating and exhausting interior pollutant sources will help reduce 

exposure to harmful chemicals. Improved heating and ventilation systems along with zone controls will 

improve thermal comfort. Visual comfort will be enhanced with multi-level lighting controls in multioccupant 

spaces, and individual control of lighting at individual workstations and offices. 



4.0 SITE ANALYSIS 

Existing Site 

Assumptions 

The site program was developed based on discussions with the Burke Predesign Building Committee and 

Olson Kundig Architects. Numerous site visits at different times of the day and year allowed the use of the 

site to be studied in more detail. 

The Tree Inventory and Assessment dated October 9, 2009 has been consulted and ‘exceptional’ trees 

have been identified and considered in the programming phase. 

0 

The site program responds to a number of major issues revealed during the site analysis process. These 

include: 

1) Poor visibility within the planting buffer on the north side of the building provides 

opportunities for illegal camping; 

2) Inadequate interior space for large functions; 

3) The lack of clear pedestrian routes and wayfinding; 

4) Exterior spaces that do not respond to the use of the building. 

Any new site development should conform to current codes and existing structures or site elements 

should be upgraded to meet these standards. Special attention should be given to the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA) and Crime Prevention through Environment Design (CPTED) standards when 

developing new circulation routes. The current University of Washington Master Plan supersedes city 

zoning requirements and should be consulted throughout the design process. 

Existing Site Description and Requirements 

General 

The Burke Museum is located at the northwest corner of the University of Washington campus in Seattle. 

The site is bordered by NE 45 th Street to the north, Memorial Way to the east, William H. Gates Hall (Law 

School) to the south and15th Avenue NE to the west. The site includes the existing Burke Museum, 

multiple surface parking lots, large areas of buffer plantings, access paths, ramps, and stairs. The Erna 

Gunther Ethnobotanical Garden is on the east side of the Museum. The site slopes about 35 feet down 

from the northeast to the southwest. 

Pedestrian Movement 

The Burke Museum is located on a major pedestrian spine. Many people walk from the corner of 15 th Ave. 

NE and NE 45 th St. through the parking lots to Memorial Way and the Law School. There are bus stops on 

the north and west sides of the site. A pedestrian-only corridor runs east-west on the south edge of the 

site, north of the Law School. ADA accessibility standards will need to be met to achieve better site 

circulation at the entrances and surrounding the site. Parking areas should incorporate defined pedestrian 

routes to facilitate effective pedestrian flow through the site and reduce safety issues. 

Safety 

Campus safety is an important consideration, and should help guide the selection and placement of 

vegetation, lighting and site elements. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) strategies 

should act as a guideline during the design process. Currently, the planting buffers to the north and west 

of the existing building do not allow view corridors through the site and present a safety hazard that 

should be mitigated in the new design of the site. 

Lighting 

There is minimal lighting around the perimeter of the Museum. Pathways within the north planting buffer 

are insufficiently lit. Site lighting should guide pedestrians and facilitate campus safety. The appropriate 

lighting will have a directional quality and will meet LEED dark sky requirements. Lighting should allow 

faces to be illuminated and trip hazards, such as stairs and low walls, to be lit. 

Site Amenities 

4-1 Site Analysis 30 June 2010


Some seating and other site amenities such as bicycle racks and trash receptacles are currently around the 

perimeter of the building. New covered bicycle racks, secure bike parking and comfortable 

seating/gathering areas should be located in appropriate areas of the site. There is a potential for 

significant gathering spaces that could function as outdoor classrooms and provide safe waiting areas for 

children getting on and off school buses. Loading areas and garbage enclosures should be screened from 

view by the general public. Existing University of Washington standards for landscape development should 

be reviewed and incorporated into the site design. 

Visibility 

The north and west planting buffers block the view corridors from 15 th Ave NE and NE 45 th Street. It is 

important to open views of the building from all sides of the site to elevate the profile of the museum as a 

significant amenity and gateway for the University while addressing safety hazards. 

Exterior Art Elements 

The sculptural elements on the site (totems, public art, geological samples, etc.) should be incorporated 

into the site design so that they relate to the overall plan and enhance the experience of visiting the 

museum. Potential to expand the collection of outdoor artifacts should be studied. 

Regulatory Issues 

Land Use Regulations - The central campus is zoned as a major institute overlay (MIO) with a height limit 

of 105 feet per the Campus Master Plan as adopted by the UW Board of Regents and the City of Seattle. 

The UW Campus Master Plan includes policies, guidelines, and development standards for campus 

development. 

Local Requirements – Site Improvements within the UW campus are governed by the following guidelines: 

1) UW Campus Master Plan, January 2003 

2) The Facilities Services Design Guide (FSDG) 

3) UW Seattle Campus Stormwater Management Program, revised March 2009. 

4) Items not covered by the above manuals are subject to City of Seattle design standards, 

unless directed otherwise by the University. 

5) The UW Environmental Health and Safety Division oversees campus environmental regulations. 

6) The Capital Projects Office is responsible for compliance with the State Environmental Act. 

The following diagram and images show existing site conditions: 











Proposed New Site Elements 

General 

The reconfiguration of the building layout by the Architects creates the possibility for strong relationships 

between interior and exterior spaces to develop. The exterior space programming responds directly to 

interior building functions and should evolve in conjunction with the building design. 

Vehicular Facilities 

Existing surface parking lots on the south and west sides of the building should be maintained with 

minimal alterations. The possibility of adding a parking area to the north side of the building within the 

planting buffer should be explored. This option would allow a significant public outdoor space to be 

developed in the current loading area/parking lot directly west of the building. A north parking lot would 

help to mitigate safety hazards by increasing visibility and creating defined pedestrian routes on the north 

and west sides of the Museum. 

There is potential for the loading dock to be relocated to the north east corner of the site with access off 

Memorial Way. The precise orientation and configuration of the loading dock in this location will require 

further study. 

The current drop off east of the building could be eliminated and moved to the south or west side of the 

building, adjacent to the entrance lobby. A minimum of two bus parking spaces should remain in the 

parking lot and should incorporate safe drop-off, waiting areas and direct access to the main entrance. 

ADA parking stalls should be provided as close to the main entry to the museum as possible. 

Pedestrian Facilities 

There is potential to greatly increase the safety and comfort of pedestrians through effective site design. 

Connections to the campus from the northwest, northeast and southeast corners of the site should be 

studied and defined and a safe walkway from the pedestrian corridor to the south of the site should be 

identified to reduce conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians. Location of pathways should address 

desired pedestrian flow and attempt to mitigate the amount of pedestrian traffic through the parking lots. 

The pathway from the corner of 15 th Ave and NE 45 th should be reconfigured to efficiently direct 

pedestrians towards the Museum instead of through the parking lot. Museum signage currently located at 

this corner should be enhanced. The buffer planting in this area should be thinned to allow some views of 

the northwest corner of the building. 

Universal Access 

Circulation and accessibility routes should be designed to serve all users with varying stages of disabilities 

including mobility limitations and visibility impairments. The design should address current University of 

Washington Universal Access standards. 

Bicycle Facilities 

Covered bicycle parking and secured bicycle parking should be provided per the University of Washington 

Bicycle Program. Numbers of bicycle racks and secure spaces should be identified as a percentage of the 

building population or square footage. 

Pathways should be designed to create a direct route for bicycles from surrounding areas to the building. 

Waste Disposal 

A collection area for waste (garbage, litter) and recycling should be provided at the loading dock. The area 

should be screened from view from usable exterior and interior spaces. The size of the collection area 

should be directly related to the proposed building population and should be further studied. 

Open Space 

Outdoor open spaces should be created adjacent to the building where possible. These spaces could 

provide opportunities for large scale events (200+ people), outdoor classrooms, long term artist in 



residence demonstration space (carving of a canoe, etc.), covered outdoor space allowing children to eat 

their lunch outside throughout the year, and outdoor exhibit space (temporary and permanent). 

These spaces should be as large as possible ranging from 4000 sq.ft. to 8000 sq.ft. and should be 

designed as flexible spaces that can facilitate multiple sizes and types of events/activities. Outdoor spaces 

should be designed to complement the building design and character. 

All open spaces should meet applicable City of Seattle stormwater codes and restrictions. Elements such 

as permeable paving materials and rain gardens should be used (where soil conditions allow) to reduce 

stormwater runoff. 

Landscape 

All changes to landscape areas should be studied based on the current Tree Inventory and Assessment. 

Exact locations of trees should be identified on a survey. The University of Washington requires a tree 

replacement ratio of one-to-one (trees lost to trees required). The UW Campus Tree Care Plan should be 

consulted for other standards and requirements. 

A native planting palette will be compatible with the existing site character and will require less water than 

conventional landscaping. Planting palettes should be formulated to use low-water and work within the 

LEED framework. Plants should be chosen based on site requirements and climate constrictions. 

The Erna Gunther Ethnobotanical Garden should be studied, improved and expanded as desired by the 

client. Use of this garden as a teaching tool is a possibility. Potential teaching gardens (water gardens, 

native flower gardens, etc.) could be incorporated into the design if funding and maintenance budgets 

allow. 

Invasive species throughout the site should be eliminated. The understory of the planting buffers on the 

north and west sides of the site should be significantly thinned out or removed. Low maintenance native 

grasses or groundcovers should be installed within the buffer areas. 

The existing tree inventory should be consulted throughout the design of the site and valuable trees 

should be protected and maintained. The trees on Memorial Way are historically valuable and every effort 

should be taken to protect them from damage. 

Irrigation 

Water efficient irrigation should be used wherever possible to reduce overspray and provide minimal 

watering to a drought adaptive plant community. The existing irrigation system piping will need to be 

understood to prevent existing plant beds from being cut-off during construction if there is a desire to 

maintain existing landscape areas. Temporary piping may be required during construction to maintain 

watering schedules. 

Site Furnishings 

Lighting, comfortable seating and trash receptacles should be provided so that they complement the 

design and improve use of the site. Safety and maintenance issues should be considered when choosing 

site furnishings. University of Washington site furnishings standards should be consulted during the 

design process. 

A signage plan should be identified during the design process. General Museum signage, gateway 

signage, and wayfinding signage should all be incorporated effectively into the design and conform with 

the University of Washington signage masterplan. 

Opportunities 

The following opportunities should be addressed in the site design: 

1) Significant improvement and addition to outdoor open space; 

2) Development of wayfinding and pedestrian circulation; 

3) Reduction of safety hazards throughout the site; 

4) Enhanced relationship between interior and exterior Museum functions. 

Constraints 



The following constraints should be considered throughout the design process: 

1) If parking areas are to remain predominantly in their current configuration, they continue to block 

pedestrian flow and create safety hazards; 

2) Existing exceptional trees and significant site slopes make site planning difficult; 

3) Relocating the loading dock will require significant study; 

4) Budget constraints may impede site design. 

The Burke Museum is an invaluable Pacific Northwest resource that preserves and celebrates our region’s 

natural history, historic artifacts and cultural heritage. Every effort should be made to enhance this 

resource while designing a safe and comfortable landscape. 

A proposed new site plan and accompanying narrative can be reviewed in the Drawings and Diagrams, 

Section 8, of this report. 



5.0 PROJECT BUDGET ANALYSIS 

Assumptions 

The planned modernization scope will address functional, structural, seismic, life safety, accessibility, and 

other code issues. It will also improve the building enclosure to comply with current energy standards. 

All major building systems will be upgraded to improve performance and energy efficiency. Finishes and 

telecommunications systems will be improved to meet modern campus standards. 

The project budget includes demolition of all existing mechanical, plumbing, electrical systems and the 

interior partitions, while leaving the existing concrete and steel structure. The overall scope includes: 

1) Replacing major building systems, controls, meters, and utility lead-ins. This includes the 

addition of air conditioning. 

2) Upgrading seismic, structural, and life safety conditions to address code deficiencies; 

3) Providing ADA compliant restrooms as well as correct other ADA non-conforming deficiencies. 

4) Installing a new elevator and stairs. 

5) Providing emergency power service. 

6) Upgrading primary power service and main electrical equipment. 

7) Replacing interior doors, hardware, finishes, and equipment. 

8) Replacing existing windows with new energy efficient units. 

9) Cleaning and repairing existing exterior brick and concrete where retained and as required. 

10) Improving existing site and landscape including irrigation. 

11) Minimum LEED Gold certification 

The layout and plan relationships will make much more efficient use of the existing space. It provides 

potential for future exhibit and collections storage. Through the implementation of the “pathway exhibit” 

scheme, the design will allow the Burke Museum visitor to experience, first hand, the vastness of the 

collections and the research activities. 

Project Cost Estimate 

Predesign budget, 2007-2009 biennium $ 300,000 

Design Budget, 2011-2013 biennium $ 5,000000 

Construction budget, 2013-2015 biennium $ 47,200,000 

Total Project $ 52,500,000 

The preferred project budget is $52,500,000 which includes $300,000 for a predesign funded in the 

2007-2009 binennium. The Burke will provide one-third ($17,500,000) of the total costs from non-state 

sources. 

The Burke museum currently expects to raise about $15,000,000 from donors and about $2,500,000 from 

grants. A summary of the Philanthropic Funding Feasibility Study is included in the appendix. 

Summaries of the construction contract costs, as well as the total project follow. Cost details are included 

in the appendix to this report 

5-1 Project Budget Analysis 30 June 2010


Cost Estimate Summary 

Consultant Services 

Total Consultant Services $ 4,539,117 

Construction Contracts 

Facility Construction $ 21,269,562 

GCCM Risk Contingency $ 514,876 

GCCM Design Build Costs $ 3,024,643 

Construction Contingencies $ 2,658,695 

WS sales tax $ 2,691,842 

Total Construction Contract $ 30,159,618 

Equipment 

Equipment $ 433,277 

Furnishings $ 433,280 

Special Construction (Exhibits) $ 3,570,000 

WS sales tax $ 434,783 

Total Equipment $ 4,871,340 

Artwork 

Total Artwork $ 80,471 

Other Costs 

Mitigation Costs (EH&S Review) $ 20,000 

Permits & Fees $ 270,000 

UWIT Connectivity $ 158,000 

In‐Plant Services $ 177,000 

Temporary Facilities $ 619,500 

Builder's Risk $ 73,788 

Surge & Moving costs (non‐state sources) $ 3,625,950 

Campus Engineering review $ 39000 

Total Other Costs $ 4,983,238 

Project Management $ 

Agency Project Management $ 2,489,012 

Pre Active Project Management $ 44,450 

Total Project Management $ 2,533,462 

Sub‐total $ 47,167,246 

Escalation $ 5,332,754 

GRAND TOTAL $ 52,500,000 



Form C-3 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Summary 





Relate the Budget to the Scope of Work 

A. New Civil Engineering Requirements 

a. Site, Paving and Grading - See the landscape drawings for the proposed site plan and paving types. 

b. Stormwater Management – The project will be subject to the City of Seattle Stormwater Code. The 

current code was signed and became effective in November 2009. A new stormwater manual was also 

effective at that time. The code and manual require compliance with minimum requirements for all 

discharges and real property to reduce the amount of pollutants in stormwater runoff in a location as 

close to the source as possible, provides for minimum requirements for all projects related to 

pollution prevention during construction and implements minimum requirements for flow control and 

stormwater treatment. The code and manual also describe drainage control review and application 

requirements as well as code enforcement. The project is required to comply with the following 

elements of the stormwater code and manual: 

i. Source Control: Specific pollutants are targeted by the source control Best Management 

Practices (BMPs) that are required to be implemented. Those pollutants are pH, total suspended 

solids, chemical and biochemical oxygen demanding substances, metals, bacteria and viruses, 

nutrients, toxic organic compounds, oils and greases and soaps and detergents. Source control 

BMPs prevent contaminants from entering the stormwater system by controlling them at the 

source rather than after they have entered the system. All real property in Seattle are required 

to implement the City-wide BMP’s described below. 

1. Eliminate illicit connections to the storm drain system. 

2. Perform routine maintenance for drainage systems 

3. Properly dispose of fluids and wastes 

4. Provide proper storage of solid wastes 

5. Provide spill prevention and cleanup 

6. Provide oversight and training for staff 

Since this project is on the University of Washington campus, it is assumed that all of the Citywide 

BMP’s are being implemented by the University. 

ii. Construction Stormwater Control: All projects with greater than 5000 square feet of new or 

replaced impervious surface or 1 acre of site disturbance are required to comply with the 

requirement set forth by the code and the manual for large projects. Drawings and narratives 

must be submitted for review that shows how the project will implement construction BMPs to 

address eighteen elements of water quality and downstream resource protection. The eighteen 

elements are: 

1. Mark Clearing Limits and Sensitive Areas 

2. Retain Top Layer 

3. Establish Construction Access 

4. Protect Downstream Properties and Receiving Waters 

5. Prevent Erosion and Sediment Transport from the Site 

6. Prevent Erosion and Sediment Transport from the Site by Vehicles 

7. Stabilize Soils 

8. Protect Slopes 

9. Protect Storm Drains 

10. Stabilize Channels and Outlets 

11. Control Pollutants 

12. Control Dewatering 

13. Maintain BMPs 

14. Inspect BMPs 

15. Execute Construction Stormwater Control Plan 

16. Minimize Open Trenches 

17. Phase the Project 

18. Install Permanent Flow Control and Water Quality Facilities 

The contractor will be required to construct and maintain all construction BMP’s during the 

duration of construction and to modify them as required for changing conditions and the 

construction sequencing. In addition the contractor will be required to file for coverage under 

the statewide general permit for construction stormwater activities in order to be in 

compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System. 



iii. Stormwater Flow Control and Water Quality Treatment: The code and manual outline minimum 

requirements for flow control and treatment based on the project boundaries, the type of 

project, the downstream collection system and receiving water, how much new plus replaced 

impervious surface is created, and how much native vegetation is converted, and how much new 

plus replaced pollution generating surface is created. In addition green stormwater 

infrastructure is required to be implemented on all projects with more than 2,000 square feet of 

new and replaced impervious surface or more than 7,000 square feet of site disturbance are 

required to implement green stormwater infrastructure. 

1. Flow control - This project site discharges to designated receiving waters – Lake 

Washington and Portage Bay therefore conventional flow control is not required. 

2. Treatment will be required if there will be more than 5,000 square feet of new plus 

replaced pollution generating impervious surfaces (PGIS). The City of Seattle preference is 

to utilized infiltration BMPs for treatment if infiltration is feasible. Soil testing will be 

required to determine if infiltration for pollutant removal is feasible at this site. 

Acceptable infiltration BMP’s include infiltration basins or trenches, bioretention (with 

infiltration), permeable pavement (with infiltration) and a dry wells (with infiltration). If 

infiltration is not feasible, acceptable treatment BMP’s include biofiltration swales, filter 

strips, wet ponds, wet vaults, treatment wetlands, sand filters, bioretention (without 

infiltration) and ecology embankments. 

3. Green stormwater infrastructure (GSI). Although flow control is not required for this 

project, GSI will be required to be implemented to the maximum extent feasible. GSI 

practices include BMPs designed to reduce runoff using infiltration, evapotranspiration or 

stormwater reuse. These BMPs may include, compost amended soils, permeable 

pavement, bioretention facilities, green roofs, trees installation and retention, rainwater 

harvesting. These methods will need to be evaluated to determine which can feasibly be 

incorporated into the project. 

c. Water – The existing 8 inch water service supplies both domestic and fire. Current University 

standards require separate fire and domestic services. It is assumed that the existing 8 inch line is 

adequate for any fire services for the proposed project, but this will need to be verified with the fire 

protection engineer. A post indicator and valve may be required to be added prior to the building 

entrance. A new domestic service will be provided from the existing 8 inch main in Memorial Way NE. 

d. Sanitary Sewer – The existing 6 inch service has adequate capacity for the proposed modifications and 

no upgrades will be required. 

B. New Architectural Requirements Narrative 

Foundations 

The proposed project includes new concrete walls and footings at the new construction perimeter 

foundations and at the elevator pit for a new service elevator. A footing strengthening allowance is 

provided in the budget for existing foundations. Perimeter foundation drainage at the new foundations is 

included. 

Vertical Structure 

Reinforced cast-in-place concrete shear walls will be constructed as required per structural requirements. 

New vertical transportation cores and shafts will be constructed of cast-in-place concrete. Steel columns 

and pilasters are presumed at areas of expansion and existing columns and pilasters will be strengthened. 

Fireproofing is typical at all structural steelwork. 

Floor Structure 

Concrete slab on grade will be installed for the new construction at the 1 st floor level. Steel framing will be 

installed at suspended floors with a concrete topped steel deck. 

Roof Structure and Roofing 

Steel framing with concrete topped steel deck at areas of new construction. New EPDM roofing on rigid 

insulation will be installed at the existing roof. 

Exterior Enclosure at New Expansion 

The exterior facades will in large part remain unchanged except that required maintenance of the exterior 

brick will be performed including replacement of deteriorated masonry units and tuck pointing where 

required. However, an allowance has been provided in the budget for the incorporation of a “brick screen” 



which will allow for exterior screening of new glazing, as well as providing a new and updated look to the 

existing building. 

Steel stud wall construction will be erected with batt insulation over furring and rigid insulation over CMU 

back-up to opaque walls. A brick rain screen system will be installed at walled areas of new construction. 

New aluminum storefront systems are indicated at new window walls with glazing specified per high 

energy performance requirements. 

Glazed aluminum storefront entry doors at public entries and hollow metal doors at service entries. 

All vertical glazing to be insulated glazing units. High performance glazing will be provided per energy 

efficiency requirements. 

Exterior Enclosure at Renovation 

Drywall over steel studs with batt insulation. 

New aluminum window system with glazing specified per code/energy requirements. 

Glazed aluminum storefront entry doors. 

Waterproofing 

Caulking and firestopping. 

Below grade waterproofing at new foundations typical. 

Interior Partitions 

New interior partitions of metal stud and gypsum wall board construction. Sound Transmission Coefficient 

(STC) rating guidelines for partition assemblies per acoustical (See Acoustical Systems Narrative below). 

Demising partitions to be built to underside of structure. 

Fire and smoke stopping at all rated walls and floor penetrations. 

Interior window walls and relites of steel construction. 

Interior doors of solid core particle board (formaldehyde free), or mineral cores at labeled doors, with 

stained hardwood veneer or painted faces. Doors provided with satin stainless steel finish hardware 

with required accessories. 

Interior Floor Finishes 

The predominant floor finish at existing and new construction will be sealed concrete. Restroom floors 

and walls, and selected areas of wet labs and exhibit shops will be ceramic tile. Office spaces will have 

high recycled content, recyclable carpet with low VOC adhesive and backing. 

Interior Wall Finishes 

Painted gypsum wallboard construction finish at most locations with plywood backing to ten feet at all 

exhibit areas. Ceramic tile at restrooms, and selected areas of wet labs and exhibit shops. 

Interior Ceiling Finishes 

To maximize ceiling height, existing and new building structure will be exposed wherever possible, 

including assembly, office, storage, and research areas with ceiling underside acoustic treatment as 

required (See Acoustical Systems Narrative below). Suspended acoustical ceiling tile systems at the Burke 

Room, the First Floor Multipurpose room, the Second Level Classroom. Interior ceiling finishes at other 

spaces to be gypsum wallboard or suspended acoustical ceiling systems. 

All interior, field-applied paints, coatings and sealants to be low VOC. 

Interior specialties to include one movable classroom-style partition between the first floor multipurpose 

room and the Burke Room, stainless steel toilet accessories and miscellaneous specialties, baked enamel 

finished toilet partitions, recessed fire extinguisher cabinets, built-in entrance mats and clear anodized 

aluminum louvers and grilles. 

One three-stop hydraulic elevator with front opening, custom finished interior. 

Other Interior Finishes 

Dry lab/workrooms, classroom and administrative spaces with p-lam finished casework and countertops. 

Wet lab work areas to have solid surface counter and backsplash material. 

C. New Structural Requirements Narrative 

The proposed new program requirements adjust the current layout for the various uses of the Burke 

Museum, while maintaining as much of the current building’s structure as possible. Limited new 



construction beyond the current building’s footprint is expected. Based on the current Burke Program 

Diagrams, we would anticipate the following structural requirements to accommodate the new program. 

Basement Floor 

The majority of the existing structure is to remain. The areas where potentially heavy storage are 

required, the existing slab on grade could require reinforcing or strengthening provided above the 

existing slab to accommodate heavy file storage systems. Possible modifications and additions to the 

existing above grade structure will likely impact local areas for strengthening footings and columns 

described in the following sections. 

First Floor 

The current program will revise the main entry to the museum from the Second Floor on the east side to 

the First Floor on the south side. This will require a new entry vestibule on the southwest end of the 

building along with new foundations and slab on grade concrete at the new floor. A new service lift will 

also be required on the north end of the existing building to accommodate the new loading dock locations 

along with new foundations and a new elevator pit and sump. 

The existing structural drawings indicate that the majority of the First and Second floor’s have a live load 

capacity of 150 pounds per square foot (psf). This should be adequate for the revised programs located 

on these levels. 

Second Floor 

The Permanent Exhibits are to be located on the east side of the second floor. Some of this area will need 

to be infilled to create a level floor where the old entry used to be. A built-up floor constructed of steel 

framing, metal deck and concrete topping would likely be utilized to establish a level floor along the east 

edge of the building. 

A light well to bring daylight into the interior space is planned. This will require a significant portion of 

the structural slab to be removed between the Permanent Exhibits and Biology programs. It is assumed 

that the structural beams can continue across the opening. The new opening will require further study to 

determine the impacts to the floor’s diaphragm capacity in this area. 

A new structural floor is being added in the administration area on the northwest corner of the existing 

building. The additional floor and roof is cantilevered from the existing structure. The existing columns 

and foundations for the first two bays adjacent to this new floor will require significant strengthening to 

support this structure or new columns and foundations will be required within the existing building to 

support the cantilevered structure. 

Second Floor Mezzanine 

A new mezzanine will be added along the west end of the building. The floor framing will likely consist of 

steel framing with metal deck and concrete topping. The footings and columns in this area will require 

additional study to determine the extent of strengthening required for this additional floor loading. 

Roof Framing 

The existing roof maybe required to support new mechanical equipment. The existing drawings indicate 

that the roof is designed for 25 psf live load which is the same as the required roof snow load. Therefore, 

the existing slab would most likely not be able to support any large mechanical equipment directly on top 

of it. A steel platform could be provided to span above the slab and bear directly over the existing 

columns to support mechanical equipment. 

Lateral System 

The lateral system for the new program will incorporate the existing concrete shear wall system. Refer to 

the Lateral Load Findings in the Existing Facilities section of this report. It is anticipated that the majority 

of lateral elements will remain in the new program; however there will most likely be modifications to 

some existing lateral elements to accommodate future program layouts. The existing east-west shear walls 

are slightly overstressed and will be more sensitive to modifications for these walls. New shear wall 

elements may be added to supplement the modifications associated with the new program design as well 

as areas that are found to be deficient from our preliminary analysis. 

Other deficient areas outlined in the Existing Facilities section will need to be addressed in the new 

program for the next phases of design. The precast wall connections and precast beam and column 

connections will need to be strengthened for seismic reasons. In addition, the high clerestory roof will 



require some type of lateral bracing around the walls between the high and low roofs. Another possible 

solution would involve strengthening the existing precast columns in order to act as a cantilevered pole 

structure for the seismic loads from the high roof. 

D. New Mechanical Requirements Narrative 

Design Criteria 

Outdoor Design Conditions 

Location: Seattle, WA 

Summer: 

68°F wet bulb (ASHRAE 0.1%). 

89°F dry bulb (ASHRAE 0.1%). 

Winter: 25°F dry bulb (ASHRAE 0.6%) 

Elevation: 15 ft 

Indoor Design Conditions: 

Office/Lab/Assembly/Classroom Areas 

Summer: 76˚F ±2˚F 

Winter: 70˚F ±2˚F 

Relative Humidity: No greater than 60% RH. 

Data Closets and Electrical Rooms 

Year around: 80°F Maximum. No humidity control. 

Exhibit Rooms 

Summer: 72˚F 

Winter: 68˚F 

Relative Humidity: 40% RH. 

ASHRAE Class A precision control to be provided 

Collection Storage 

Temperature and humidity set-points for design will be based on curator needs by department. 

ASHRAE Class A precision control to be provided/ 

Computer/Server Rooms 

Year around: 68 to 72°F. 

Ventilation Rates 

Per Chapter 3 of the Washington State Energy Code; ventilation rates shall be provided per the Washington 

State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code (VIAQ) (WAC 51-13). 

In lab spaces, air change rates will be specified considering the specific needs of each laboratory for 

exhaust flow, ordinary indoor air quality, thermal comfort and potentially other considerations. The 

total volume of air supply to each laboratory shall be designed to meet indoor air quality (IAQ) 

requirements as specified by ASHRAE and other applicable codes and standards. The laboratory 

should operate with 100% outside air for the supply flow. 

Air Pressure Relationships: 

Offices: Generally ambient to positive compared to outdoors 

Labs: Negative relative to other spaces in labs with laboratory exhaust systems (e.g. fume hoods), neutral 

in computational labs relative to other spaces 

Laboratory support spaces: negative to corridor 

Corridor: Generally ambient, but positive to laboratory 

Exhibit Rooms: Positive compared to other spaces 

Collections Storage Rooms: Positive compared to other spaces 



Assembly and Classroom Spaces: Generally ambient to positive compare to outdoors 

Restrooms, Copy Rooms and Kitchenettes: Negative to adjacent spaces 

Noise Criteria - Provide equipment, air distribution systems and air devices not to exceed the following 

NC (Noise Criteria) or RC (Room Criteria) levels (this criteria will need to confirmed with the project 

acoustical consultant in the design development phase): 

Applicable Codes and Regulations 

Space Conference Rooms Offices 

Maximum NC or RC 

Level (Hertz) 

Standards: 

NFPA 13 – Installation of Sprinkler Systems 

NFPA 14 – Standpipes and Hose Systems 

ASHRAE Standards 90.1, 55 and 62.1 

Mechanical Systems 

NC / RC 30 

(db) 

NC / RC 35 

(db) 

Labs and 

Back of 

House 

NC / RC 40 

(db) 

31.5 -- / 55 -- / 60 -- / 65 

63 57 / 50 60 / 55 64 / 60 

125 47 / 45 53 / 50 57 / 55 

250 41 / 40 46 / 45 51 / 50 

500 35 / 35 40 / 40 45 / 45 

1000 31 / 30 36 / 35 41 / 40 

2000 29 / 25 34 / 30 39 / 35 

4000 28 / 20 33 / 25 38 / 30 

8000 27 / -- 32 / -- 37 / -- 

General 

The building is not mechanically cooled and depends upon the outside air temperature for cooling. 

Therefore in the warm summer months the building becomes uncomfortable. Chilled water from the 

campus system is not available due to the remote location of the building in relation to the campus chilled 

water system. Therefore mechanical cooling that is needed as part of the proposed project will need to be 

developed on site. 

Heating System 

The existing heating energy source is the campus low pressure steam system that supplies steam to the 

building through an underground tunnel system. The steam condensate is pumped back to the campus 

boiler plant. 

The steam is used to generate hot water as the primary heat source in the building using a steam to hot 

water convertor. The building is heated and ventilated by a large constant volume multi-zone system 

located in the basement. Hot water is circulated through the zone heating coils to provide zone control. 

These zones are large and do not provide good local zone control for the smaller individual spaces. 

As part of the proposed project it is recommended that this system be replaced with a heating and cooling 

system as required to meet the individual space requirements and meet the current Washington State 

Energy Codes. 

Controls 



The building is currently provided with a pneumatic control system. When the building mechanical system 

is replaced, it is recommended that a Direct Digital Control system be installed and connected to the 

campus management system. 

Plumbing 

The building is provided with a single source of water for firetwo 2 for domestic use. The hot water and 

cold water piping is from the original installation which used galvanized piping. This has been reported to 

be in poor condition and should be replaced. Not all of the laboratory fixtures are separated from fixtures 

requiring potable water and therefore any future replacements should have separate water supply for the 

laboratories. 

The hot water for the building is generated by steam tube bundle fitted into a 300 gallon storage tank. 

This system is part of the original installation and should be replaced. 

The condition of the sanitary and storm water systems is unknown and will require inspection and 

replacement where necessary. 

Fire Protection 

The building is fully sprinklered and there are no record of any pipe failures. It is expected that the system 

would need to be replaced or at least modified to meet the requirements of any proposed room changes. 

The system will require that a new separate water source be provided from the street main in Memorial 

Way. 

Plumbing Systems 

General 

Existing domestic water and sanitary service connections will be evaluated for reuse, and coordinated with 

the civil engineer. 

Domestic Cold Water Systems 

The water service will be designed to provide water to the building’s fixtures and equipment at a minimum 

pressure of 35 psig. Maximum pressure will not exceed 80 psig and flow velocity will not exceed 8 fps. 

The building’s water system will be isolated from the municipal water system by a duplex reduced 

pressure backflow preventer located downstream of the water meter. 

Domestic Hot Water Systems 

The heating system will include a distribution loop in the main mechanical room that circulates water from 

a new indirect DHW heater that captures heating water off a campus steam convertor. 

A new domestic hot water distribution system will be provided for central portions of the building to 

ensure that all fixtures and equipment that require hot water will have it readily available. An "in-line" 

recirculating all bronze pump controlled by an aquastat will be provided. The aquastat will shut down the 

recirculating pump whenever hot water within the system reaches design temperature. 

Piping shall be type K copper. 

Instantaneous tank-less gas-fired water heaters will be provided in locker rooms. 

Water will be provided at a temperature of 120°F. 

Storm Drainage Systems 

The roof storm water will feed into new vertical rainwater leaders. The rainwater leaders will connect to 

outside the building to storm water drainage piping as coordinated with the civil engineer. Overflow 

drainage will be accomplished through overflow drainage system. 

Sanitary Waste and Vent Systems 

A gravity cast iron sanitary drainage system will be provided to serve all plumbing fixtures and floor 

drains. Horizontal runs will be limited to maximize ceiling height. Piping will be collected below slab and 

routed to the existing sanitary sewer system connection. Vertical drops will be located at main vertical 



structural elements in order to maintain flexibility in the open spaces for future changes or renovations. 

Sanitary vents will follow the same route as the sanitary waste piping and discharge to the atmosphere 

above the roof. 

Natural Gas 

A new natural gas.service connection may be required, depending on program needs of lab spaces. Gas 

pressure will be determined based on equipment requirements. If no natural gas is anticipated to be 

needed to be centrally piped and distributed to serve lab and fume hood gas outlets, then this building 

service connection could be omitted, depending on final approved HVAC and domestic heating water 

system strategies. 

Plumbing Fixtures 

To help achieve LEED certification objectives, low flow water fixtures, low-flow urinals, low flow or dual 

flush toilets and low flow shower heads will be considered throughout. Non-refrigerated drinking 

fountains will also be considered. 

General Interior Plumbing Requirements 

All internal domestic water, and metallic storm piping shall be insulated as required by the Energy Code 

(minimum 1” thick), complete with vapor sealing on cold water lines. All domestic water systems shall be 

chemically cleaned to AWWA requirements. 

Tepid water to emergency fixtures will be provided by, a master thermostatic mixing valve with cold water 

bypass device. 

Sinks will be provided with domestic hot and cold water. 

All plumbing systems shall be pressure tested. 

All piping shall be identified and color-coded as required with appropriate labels and flow arrows. 

Non-freeze hose bibbs will be provided around the exterior of the buildings. 

All piping systems shall be designed to incorporate earthquake restraints as required by code. 

Hose bibbs in equipment rooms will be provided c/w vacuum breakers. 

Floor drains will be provided as required throughout building. 

Floor drains, floor sinks and indirect waste receptors will be provided with automatic trap primers when 

subject to loss of their trap seals due to evaporation. 

For water systems, manufactured shock absorbers will be provided for each group of plumbing fixtures or 

remotely located plumbing fixture. 

Laboratory Plumbing Systems 

Laboratory Waste and Vent System 

Plumbing fixtures in laboratories and laboratory support spaces will be provided with a drainage system 

separate from the sanitary drainage system. The laboratory waste system will drain by gravity to a 

neutralization basin located exterior to the building. The effluent from the neutralization basin will 

discharge into the site sanitary sewer. 

Below ground laboratory waste and vent piping will be schedule 80 flame-retardant polypropylene pipe, 

ASTM D4101, with socket fusion joints. 

Above ground laboratory waste and vent piping will be Schedule 80 flame-retardant polypropylene pipe, 

ASTM D4101, with socket fusion joints. 

High Purity Water. 

A system will be provided for lab spaces requiring it to produce and distribute water meeting the quality 

requirements of ASTM Type I microbial level Type C as determined by the owner. A pure water storage 

tank of will be provided to ensure that water is available for distribution in the event that the production 

system is shut down. 



The production equipment is anticipated to consist of a prefilter, multimedia filter, carbon filter, a duplex 

water softener, single RO unit, two-bed deionization exchange cylinders, mixed bed deionization 

exchange cylinders, a one micron post filter, a 185 nm ultraviolet light, and a 0.2 micron final filter. 

The distribution system equipment will include centrifugal pump(s) to provide circulation and 254 nm UV 

lights followed by 0.2 micron filters to control bacterial growth. 

Polypropylene piping will be used for the distribution system. 

Instrument Compressed Air. 

Laboratory grade compressed air will be provided to all laboratory areas that require it at a pressure of 50 

psig and a dewpoint of -40°F. Compressed air will be provided as required by the University. 

Laboratory Vacuum. 

Laboratory vacuum air will be provided to all laboratory areas where programmed. Vacuum will terminate 

at laboratory outlets or equipment connections as required. 

Specialty Gases. 

Specialty gas systems will be provided to all laboratory areas where programmed and will terminate at 

laboratory outlets or equipment connections as required. 

Fire Sprinklers 

The building is fully sprinklered and there are no records of any pipe failures. The system would need to 

be modified to meet the requirements of any proposed room changes. The system will further require that 

a new separate water source be provided from the street main in Memorial Way. 

Clean agent fire suppression will be considered in lieu of sprinklers for areas with collections that curators 

identify are most likely to suffer unacceptable levels of damage from water. Preaction sprinkler systems 

may also be selectively deployed in areas where the risk identified by curators of accidental discharge 

justifies the added initial cost and on-going maintenance costs of such a system. 

A fire department connection to serve the automatic sprinkler system will be provided at a location 

coordinated with the Seattle Fire Department 

HVAC Systems 

Central Plant and Hydronic Distribution System 

Chilled and heated water will be provided by two heat recovery chillers located in the lower level 

mechanical room. In cooling mode, these will produce 42˚F chilled water with a return chilled water 

temperature of 54˚F. On the condenser water side, the heat recovery chillers will reject heat to a fluid 

cooler located on the roof. 

In heating mode the heat recovery chillers can produce 140˚F hot water with a return water temperature 

of 120˚F. On the evaporator side, moderate temperature water of about 62˚F returned from chilled 

beams serving interior spaces will serve as the heat recovery chiller’s source of heat during the day. When 

heating is required at during unoccupied periods at night the heat recovery chillers extract heat by 

recirculating water through phase change thermal storage tanks, recharging the storage tanks in the 

process for use by chilled beams during the day. 

For additional heating capacity or as back-up to the heat recovery chiller, a steam convertor will be 

available to extract heat from the campus steam loop. 

Thermal storage tanks with phase change materials (PCM’s) at a higher freezing temperature than water 

(i.e. 55˚F phase change temperature) will store cooling energy for supply to the chilled beams. Charging 

of the tanks will occur during periods when heating is being provided by the heat recovery chillers during 

unoccupied periods during the heating season by use the next day by chilled beams. During the cooling 

season, the fluid coolers on the roof will operate at night when wet bulbs are below 50F to produce cool 

water for circulation through the thermal storage tanks. 

The supply water temperature for the chilled beams is 58˚F with a return water temperature of 62˚F. 



The PCM thermal storage tanks will contain type S15 salt hydrate solution in a “FlatICE” configuration by 

Phase Change Material Products Ltd. The tanks will be located in the mechanical room on the lower level. 

Pumps, expansion tanks, air separator, chemical feed tank, valves and controls will be provided as needed 

for the central plant. 

Distribution systems from the central plant are as follows: 

Moderate temperature chilled water (58˚F) to chilled beams. 

Low temperature chilled water (42˚F) to air handler chilled water coils and to zone cooling coils 

serving exhibit space and collections storage spaces requiring precision HVAC 

Heating water loop serving air handlers, chilled beams in perimeter spaces and zone heating coils 

serving exhibit spaces and collections storage spaces requiring precision HVAC. 

The water distribution systems that serve air handling units and terminal units (chilled beams) will be 

variable flow to reduce pumping energy, with two way pressure independent control valves with the 

exception that three-way control valves are used on those terminal units at the end of runs in order to 

maintain heating water availability throughout the system. 

Strainers: Strainers with drain valve will be provided at each pump, control valve and at the top of the 

heating hot water supply risers and at each coil for drain down 

Chilled and heated water will be distributed to AHU coils and chilled beams via a combination of Type L 

copper (up to 3 inches) and Schedule 40 steel piping. 

Insulation for piping will be provided as required by the Washington State Energy Code. The condenser 

water pipes will need to be insulated in order to prevent condensation. 

Shut-off valves will be provided for each piece of piped equipment to permit replacement, accessible 

service and repair without disturbing other equipment that is not dependent on operation of the 

equipment to be serviced. 

Ventilation Air and Heat Recovery for Labs and Spaces with Chilled Beams 

Ventilation air for spaces served by active chilled beams will be provided by rooftop air handling units 

(AHU’s) with heat recovery connected to exhaust systems. A dedicated AHU will be provided for lab 

spaces and another for all other spaces served by chilled beams (i.e., excludes collection storage and 

exhibit spaces). 

The quantity of air being supplied and exhausted to each lab by the lab AHU is modulated independently 

as required to satisfy either the occupancy schedule (i.e. night setbacks), minimum room air change rates, 



or fume hood exhaust requirements. Other non-lab spaces will be supplied with a constant volume of air 

equal to the minimum required by the space in accordance with code. 

Each AHU will include a heating coil, cooling coil, MERV 8 pre-filers, MERV 13 final filters, heat recovery 

coil (lab unit) or wheel (non-lab unit), and supply fan with variable speed drive. These units operate with 

100% outdoor air. 

The supply air distribution will be via externally insulated galvanized ductwork. 

Pressure independent VAV laboratory airflow control system valves will be provided for air supplied to lab 

spaces. 

Exhaust Air System for Laboratory Spaces 

The laboratories will be exhausted by two exhaust fans located on the roof, with one as standby. The lab 

air variable volume system will exhaust the labs via the fume hoods; process exhaust and/or general 

exhaust registers. Variable volume valves will be used in spaces in exhausts from spaces with fume 

hoods. The variable volume valves connected to the fume hoods will be coated for corrosion protection. 

General exhaust inlets with variable volume valves will be provided as required to supplement the fume 

hood exhaust system to maintain the minimum air change rates required. 

The exhaust fans will not be provided with standby power to maintain the required airflow through the lab 

spaces and fume hoods during power outage. The labs are expected to be evacuated during a power 

outage and not occupied after power is restored until the lab supply and exhaust systems have operated 

for a period of time to ventilate the spaces. 

Fume hood exhaust will be at minimum stack discharge velocity of 3000 FPM, or a 25’ plume height using 

a motorized make-up air damper. Exhaust air ducts from the fume hood laboratory airflow control system 

dampers to the fans will be sized at a maximum velocity of 2000 FPM to minimize energy used to exhaust 

the air. A heat recovery coil will be installed in the exhaust air duct for the labs, to exchange heat with 

outdoor air being introduced at the lab air handling unit. 

The centrifugal exhaust fans for the labs will be spark proof construction with motor out of the air stream, 

chemical resistant phenolic coating. Motorized isolation valve, sound attenuator and exhaust stack will be 

provided for each fan. 

Air Handling Units for Collections Storage and Exhibit Spaces 

Precision heating, cooling and humidification will be provided for spaces that are expected to contain 

sensitive artifacts for extended periods of time. These all-air constant volume systems will be located on 

the roof and are expected to operate 24/7. 

Each AHU will include a MERV 8 pre-filers, MERV 13 final filters, gas-phase filtration (if required), supply 

and return fans, mixing box for air economizer operation, and preheat coil. Zone heating and cooling 

valves and electric humidifiers will be provided to efficiently manage space temperature and humidity 

levels. 

Variable Air Volume Air Handling Unit 

Classroom spaces, meeting rooms and other places of public assembly, characterized by high density, 

transient occupant loads and no precision HVAC requirement will be served by an all-air variable volume 

system located on the roof. 

The AHU will have a chilled water coil, heating water coil, air economizer, MERV 13 filers, supply and 

return fans. Supply ducts will distribute air to each floor with zone control using fan powered terminals 

for each zone. Demand control ventilation (DCV) will be provided for each room. 



Duct and fan construction 

Galvanized Steel duct will be utilized for all general room exhaust and combined exhaust mains. 

316 Welded Stainless Steel exhaust ducts and plenum will be utilized for all fume hood connections until 

combined with general room exhaust at the main exhaust duct lines and for the duct located in the rated 

vertical shaft. 

All ductwork will be constructed per the 1995 SMACNA duct construction standards and duct leakage will 

not exceed 2001 ASHRAE leakage class of CL 3. 

Active Chilled Beams for Heating and Cooling 

Lab spaces and office HVAC will be provided using active chilled beams. Active chilled beams have coils in 

ceiling-mounted boxes. Active chilled beams use ventilation air that flows through the diffuser. The 

ventilation air is introduced into the diffuser box through small air jets, which induce room air to flow 

through the coils. Because the active introduction of ventilation air magnifies the natural induction effect, 

active chilled beams are also commonly referred to as induction diffusers 

Interior zones served by chilled beams will be supplied with chilled water. Perimeter zones with chilled 

beams will be configured for 4-pipe distribution, so either heating or cooling can be provided to each 

chilled beam zone, as required. 

Elevator Machine Rooms, IDF and MDF Rooms: 

The elevator machine rooms and IDF and MDF rooms will be air-conditioned using mini-split air 

conditioner with wall mounted or ceiling mounted indoor unit and a single condensing unit mounted on 

roof. Condensate drains will be run to nearest indirect plumbing drain. 

Electric Closet Ventilation System: 

The electrical closet on each floor will be ventilated using a transfer air fan. Each electrical closet will be 

provided with a return air/make up air opening with fire damper above the finished ceiling of the 

adjoining space. 

Toilet Ventilation Systems: 

Each toilet room will be ventilated through a toilet exhaust system ducted to the AHU exhaust fan located 

at the roof that is part of the 100% air ventilation system. The system shall be capable of exhausting a 

minimum of 2 cfm/sf or 10 air changes per hour, whichever is greater. 

Direct Digital Control System 

A Direct Digital Control (DDC) System is proposed to provide maximum operating efficiency for the 

mechanical systems and precision control for collections storage, exhibit space, and laboratories. The 

DDC system will consist of the following sub-systems: 

Direct digital control panels located at each mechanical system. 

A computer and web based front-end interface will be provided for the building management to 

monitor, trend, control and optimize the operation of the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 

systems 

Room temperature sensors, control valves, and miscellaneous control components equipped with 

DDC controls interconnected to the central system. 

Integration with existing campus DDC system to enable remote monitoring and control. 



CO2 sensors in occupied spaces with forced air ventilation will be used to monitor and verify 

adequate ventilation rates and, where appropriate, be used to enable demand control ventilation 

sequence to reduce energy consumption. 

Lab fume hood controls 

Economizer cooling using outdoor air will be used to reduce energy consumption, per code. 

The BMS system will be set up to easily trend logs and sequentially download them for long-term 

data storage. 

To enable on-going measurement and verification (M&V) to help building operators optimize 

building performance, meters with remote metering capability or automatic meter reading (AMR) 

capability shall be provided to collect energy use data for each supply energy source. Submetering 

with remote metering capability shall be provided to collect energy use data for each 

major subsystem component. All building meters shall be configured to communicate energy 

consumption data to a meter data management system. Meters shall provide data a minimum of 

daily and shall record a minimum of hourly consumption of energy. The meter data management 

system shall be capable of electronically storing energy meter data and creating user reports 

showing calculated hourly, daily, monthly and annual energy consumption for each meter. These 

reports, and access to the stored data, shall be through a dashboard format. 

E. New Electrical Systems Narrative 

Codes and Standards: 

WAC Washington Administrative Code 

ANSI American National Standards Institute 

IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 

IES Illuminating Engineering Society of North America 

NEC National Electrical Code 

NECA National Electrical Contractors Association 

NEMA National Electrical manufacturers Association 

NFPA National Fire Protection Association 

UL Underwriters Laboratories 

SEC Seattle Electrical Code 

NFPA 70, 72, 101, 110, 780 

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines 

NORMAL POWER SERVICE AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 

The remodeled Burke Museum will receive its normal power via the building's existing 13.8kV feeder 

derived from an existing medium voltage switch in manhole NW7A and fed from UW campus 13.8 kV 

feeders WA-4 and WB-4. The existing building entry primary switch will also be reused. 

The existing primary feeder will feed a new single ended substation located in the building main electrical 

room. The substation will include a 1500kVA 13.8kV:480/277V transformer and a 2000A, 480/277V, 

three phase, four wire distribution switchboard that will provide power to all of the electrical loads in the 

building. This service switchboard will feed 480/277V mechanical and lighting panelboards, the 

mechanical power panels located in the building mechanical spaces and lighting panels located in shallow 

closets in the various quadrants of the building where they are needed. 

The service switchboard will also feed a 500kVA, 480:208/120V, three phase, 4 wire step down 

transformer for receptacles, exhibit lighting, office equipment, audio visual, communications and 

miscellaneous 208/120V loads in the building. This stepdown transformer will serve a 1600A, 208/120V, 

three phase, 4 wire distribution switchboard. The transformer and distribution switchboard will both be 

located in the main electrical room. The distribution switchboard will feed a series of technical power and 

miscellaneous power panelboards located in shallow closets in the various quadrants of the building 

where they are needed near concentrations of load. 



Secondary Design Voltages: 

General Lighting - 277V, 1 phase 

Exhibit Lighting - 120V, 1 phase 

Kitchen Equipment - 408Y/277V and 208/120V, 3 phase, 4 wire 

Motors ½ HP and more - 408Y/277V, 3 phase, 4 wire 

Receptacles, Motors less - 120V, 1 phase 

than 1/2 HP 

Equipment Sizing Criteria: 

Branch Circuit Load Calculations 

Lighting - Actual Installed VA 

Receptacles - 180 VA per outlet 

Special Outlets - Actual installed VA 

of equipment 

Demand Factors 

Lighting - 125% of installed VA 

Receptacles - 100% of first 10 KVA 

installed plus 50% of 

balance 

Motors - 125% of VA of largest 

motor plus 100% of VA 

of all other motors 

Fixed Equipment - 100% of total VA installed 

Minimum Bus Sizes 

Lighting Panels - 100A 

Equipment Panels - 225A 

General Receptacle, 

Miscellaneous Panels - 225A 

Power Receptacles 

120V power receptacles will be 15A industrial grade receptacles, 120V, single phase, (20A for dedicated 

circuit receptacles). Specialty voltage receptacles will be provided where needed for specific equipment or 

loads. Wall mounted receptacles will be flush mounted except surface mounting will be allowed in utility 

spaces. 

Power receptacles will be mounted in walls except there will be a floor box receptacle near the 

presentation wall of the Burke room, where needed to support a movable lectern. There will also be a grid 

of floor box receptacles in the exhibit spaces to provide flexible power as required for changing exhibits. 

Convenience receptacles will be limited to five on a circuit. 

Convenience outlets will be provided on each wall of offices and as needed elsewhere for general use. 

Weatherproof exterior duplex receptacles will be provided adjacent to all outdoor mechanical equipment 

and on all sides of the building exterior walls for general outdoor use. 

Distribution 

All power circuit and feeder conductors will be copper. 

Branch circuits will originate at the branch panels and be distributed in EMT conduit to the lighting, 

receptacle or fixed equipment connections. Homeruns will be limited to three circuits per conduit. 

Dedicated neutrals will be provided for all branch circuits. 

Branch panel feeders will route in EMT. 

Emergency/Standby Power 

Emergency power will be provided for egress lighting and exit signs. The total expected load is 

approximately 15kVA. Emergency power for the Burke Museum will come from an automatic transfer 



switch located in the main electrical room. The transfer switch will be fed normal power from the building 

service switchboard. The emergency power feed to this transfer switch will come from a 50A feeder 

derived from the emergency power system in an adjacent building, to avoid the expense of routing 

primary power from the campus 2.4kV emergency power loop to the Burke and transforming it there for 

such a small load. The emergency power from the adjacent building will derive from the UW 2.4kV 

emergency power loop. 

Distribution 

Emergency power will distribute from a 480/277V branch panelboard fed by the automatic transfer switch. 

Branch circuit distribution criteria for the emergency system will be similar to that for the normal power 

system. 

Optional/Standby Power 

Additional back-up power needs for refrigerators and freezers storing collections will be investigated 

during design. 

Interior Lighting 


Design lighting Levels (In Average Maintained Foot-candles): 

Offices 30-50 

Lobby, Circulation 15-20 

Burke Room, Multi-use Room, 

Classroom 30-50 

Exhibits work lights 25-35 

Storage areas in departmental spaces 15-20 

Work areas in departmental spaces 30-50 

Building Support 15-20 

Select corridor/exit pathway lighting fixtures and all EXIT signs will be served by separate, un-switched, 

night lighting circuits connected to the emergency system. 

Select light fixtures, in all rooms with legal requirements for egress lighting per occupancy load, will be 

fed from the emergency power system. 

EXIT signs will be LED type. 

The ampacity of lighting circuits will be sized for 25% future growth plus 125% continuous loading factor 

per the National Electric Code. 

Lighting Equipment 

Lighting Fixture Types: 

Burke Room: 

• Suspended T5 linear fluorescent direct/indirect lighting system with the direct component 

of the front row separately controlled. Halogen display lighting for wall mounted exhibits 

and separately controlled downlights at the front of the room for presentation lighting. 

Lobby: 

• Suspended T5 linear fluorescent direct/indirect lighting. Halogen display lighting for wall 

mounted exhibits. 

Multi-purpose Room and Classroom: 

• Suspended T5 linear fluorescent direct/indirect lighting system with the direct component 

of the front row separately controlled and separately controlled downlights at the front of 

the room for presentation lighting. 



Exhibit Spaces: 

• Multiple zones of suspended lighting track and a separately switched system of ceiling 

mounted fluorescent work lights. 

Departmental areas and Pathway Exhibits: 

• Ceiling mounted T5 fluorescent direct lighting. Lighting in the Pathway exhibit areas will 

be selected with more of an esthetic consideration. 

Offices and Education: 

• Suspended T5 linear fluorescent direct/indirect lighting system. 

Private Corridor: 

• Flush mounted fluorescent lay in troffers with prismatic lenses. 

Lamp and Ballasts: 

In general, florescent lamps will be 28 or 54 watt, T5 or T5HO, and 3500K color temperature, with a color 

rendering index (CRI) of 75 or greater. 

Fluorescent ballasts will be high frequency electronic type with less than 10% total harmonic distortion . 

Interior Lighting Control: 

Lighting control will be designed to meet the current Seattle Energy Code requirements. 

Lighting in all spaces will have automatic off controls. Wherever practical, interior lighting will be 

controlled by occupancy sensors and local switching. 

Where occupancy sensor control is not practical because of space use and configuration, such as in the 

corridors, pathways,departmental areas and work lights in the exhibit spaces, the lighting will be 

controlled by a programmable low voltage relay switching system with automatic off function during after 

hours and with local override switches in all rooms allowing room use after the programmed shut off time. 

There will a programmable, multi-scene lighting dimming control system in the exhibit spaces, the Lobby, 

Burke Room, Multi-purpose Room and Classroom. This will allow for flexible control of display lighting in 

the exhibit areas, Lobby and Burke Room and presentation lighting in the Multi-purpose Room and 

Classroom. 

Lighting in all daylighted zones not exempted by the Seattle Energy Code will be automatically dimmer 

controlled by low voltage, ceiling mounted photosensors for constant daylight dimming, to provide 

daylight zone control as required by the Energy Code. 

Distribution 

All lighting circuit wiring will be in conduit, routed within walls, partitions, or ceiling cavity. Surfacemounted 

conduit will be minimized. 

Exterior Lighting 

New exterior lighting will be provided at building exits and exterior walls to meet safety and security 

requirements. Exterior lighting will be color corrected metal halide and will meet campus light pollution 

standards. 

Fire Alarm System 

The Burke Museum will have a Simplex 4100U addressable fire alarm system monitored by the campus 

McCulloh loop system via the campus utility tunnel system. Alarm initiating devices and alarm signal 

appliances will be provided as necessary to comply with local codes and the University's design guidelines. 


The fire alarm system will be fully addressable, with addressable initiating devices. The system will 

include manual pull stations at exits, smoke detectors in air ducts at fire/smoke dampers, monitoring 



valve position and water flow switches on the sprinkler water system and combination horn/strobes in all 

common and public areas. The Fire Alarm Control Panel (FACP) will be located in the building mechanical 

room and will include annunciation, monitors, and control. A remote system annunciator panel will be 

located at an exterior door for the use of the fire department responding to an alarm. 

Equipment 

All system components will be manufactured by Simplex. 

Distribution 

All Fire Alarm system wiring will be in dedicated conduit and labeled per the University standards 

Telecommunications Systems Narrative 

INTRODUCTION 

This following is a review of the existing telecommunications systems in the Burke Museum and an 

assessment of their condition for reuse and compliance with current UWIT Standards and codes, and 

design criteria for the renovation and remodel of the existing building. 

GENERAL CONDITIONS 

Existing building telecommunications systems are fed by campus copper and fiber optical cables from the 

UW utility tunnel system. They enter the building from the tunnel system at the southeast corner of the 

building. The feed cables are terminated in a main building entrance room referred to as the MDF (main 

distribution facility) located in the first floor southeast corner of the building. 

Voice and data outlets are distributed throughout the building in wall outlets and are a mix of legacy 

Category 3 and 5 or 5e cables and associated hardware. The cable termination hardware is scattered 

throughout the building in closets or wherever wall mounting space could be found. 

The building lacks dedicated spaces (rooms) for telecommunications cable termination, electronic 

equipment mounting, and accessory hardware installation. The telecommunications spaces should be 

dedicated to telecommunications functions with controlled access to telecom personnel. 

The building lacks a coordinated system of communications cable pathways for the proper distribution of 

low voltage cables that may include but are not limited to voice telephone, data local area networking 

(LAN), security, energy management controls (EMC), audio and video, etc. 

Telecommunications Building Entrance Facilities 

Per UWIT personnel the existing MDF Room (room 134) is acceptable for reuse as the new MDF Room and 

is adequately sized but not up to the newer UWIT Standards for an MDF. 

If the existing MDF Room can be reused at its present location the existing campus feed cables of copper 

and fiber optical (FO) can be reused as presently sized and installed. This would eliminate the necessity to 

remove the existing cables during demolition provided they can be protected from damage during 

construction. 

Should it be necessary to remove the existing cables, UWIT requires that they be removed for their entire 

length and all new cables be installed in their place. This effort is separately funded by UWIT and not 

required to be included in the new construction contract. 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS 

The Telecommunications System will consist of the following basic elements: 

• Outside plant (OSP) campus copper and fiber optic cables to feed the building. 

o Note: these cables if not reused are not in the contract and are provided by UWIT under 

separate contract. 

• Telecommunications spaces/rooms to house voice and data networking electronic equipment 

mounted on walls or in equipment racks. 

• Building pathways consisting of conduits, outlet boxes, cable trays, and conduit sleeves. 

• A structured cabling system (SCS) for the building interior. 

• Backbone copper and fiber optical cables between the telecommunications rooms. 



• Work area (station) communications outlets with faceplates and outlet connector jacks. 

• Testing of installed cables to Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) designated 

performance standards for both copper and fiber optical cables. 

• A telecommunications grounding system bonded to the building's main electrical service panel 

ground system. 

DESIGN CRITERIA 

Design Codes, Standards, and Methods 

• UWIT Facilities Design Information standards (FDI). 

• Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA). 

• Telecommunications Building Wiring Standards (TIA/EIA). 

• Electronics Industry Alliance (EIA). 

• National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 

• NFPA 70, National Electrical Code (NEC). 

• Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL). 

• ANSI American National Standards Institute. 

• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 

• Washington Administrative Codes (WAC). 

• Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADA). 

• Local fire code, building code, mechanical code, electrical code, rules and interpretations required 

by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). 

• BICSI Telecommunications Design and Methods Manuals. 

Outside Plant Infrastructure 

Refer to General Conditions, Telecommunications Building Entrance Facilities statements above that 

address how the building feed cables enter the building. If a new MDF Room is created then a pathway of 

two 4" conduits will be required between the new MDF Room and the existing utility tunnel in which to 

route new campus feed cables. UWIT will provide, under separate contract, copper and fiber optical cable 

installation to the new building. 

Telecommunications Spaces and Pathways 

Telecom Spaces and Rooms shall be designed as follows: 

• Provide for cable terminations. 

o Entrance feed cables and lightning protection when required by code. 

o Backbone cables. 

o Horizontal cables to work stations. 

• Equipment rack installation to contain: 

o FO cable termination hardware. 

o Backbone cable termination hardware. 

o Horizontal cable patch panels. 

• Provide for equipment and hardware grounding. 

The MDF requires space to terminate the campus feed cables. The copper cable will be a minimum of 100pairs 

to serve the building. The FO cable will be sized at 24-strands of singlemode. The terminating 

equipment can be either wall mounted or rack mounted. Rack mounted equipment requires minimum 

work area clearances front and back of an equipment rack. 

Intermediate Distribution Facilities (IDF) rooms shall be provided on each floor and preferably stacked 

vertically above the MDF to permit shorter cable runs and fewer pathways between rooms. IDF's shall be 

sized at a minimum of 9'x9'. 

Fire retardant, painted, 4'x8' sheets of plywood shall be mounted on all four walls of a 

telecommunications room mounted at 12" AFF to the bottom of the plywood. 

The MDF and IDF Rooms will require HVAC cooling based upon the amount of heat generating electronic 

equipment installed in each space. It is estimated that a minimum cooling amount be provided for 5000 

Btu's of heat load. 



An overhead system of cable runway (ladder style cable tray) will be provided in each MDF/IDF for routing 

of cables around the room from points of entrance to the terminating hardware. 

Cables and pathways shall be installed in accordance with ANSI/TIA/EIA Telecommunications Building 

Wiring Standards, UW Facilities Design Information, and BICSI Methods. 

Cable pathways shall be designed in accordance with TIA Standard 569-C and consist of conduit and 

boxes, cable tray, and conduit sleeves to support horizontal cable distribution between individual work 

station outlet locations and the MDF Equipment Room. Minimum raceway bend radii and pull box 

placement and sizing shall be adhered to per TIA 569-C. Cable tray shall be accessible and at an elevation 

range of 10-feet to 14-feet above finished floors. Outlet box conduit will extend to the nearest cable tray 

or be homerun to the MDF Equipment Room. 

Open running of cables on hanger supports is not acceptable and not in accordance with UWIT Standards. 

Structured Cabling System (SCS) 

The SCS will consist of the following items: 

• Product will comply with the most current and updated UWIT Facilities Design Information (FDI). 

• Horizontal Category 5e (CAT5e) four pair, unshielded twisted pair (UTP) cable. 

• Double gang, 8-port, faceplates or device plates that contain data outlet connector jacks. 

• CAT5e outlet connector jacks of 8-position, 8-pin, RJ45 type, insulation displacement contact (IDC) 

construction. 

• CAT5e 48-port patch panels rack or wall mounted in telecom rooms. 

Building Backbone (riser) Cables 

Backbone cables will be provided between the MDF Room and all IDF Rooms in the building. Cables shall 

be multipair, shielded twisted pair (STP) for copper and singlemode fiber optical cables with the type and 

size designed to comply with the most current UWIT standards and service requirements for backbone 

cables in these structures. 

Work Area Outlets (Stations) 

Work area outlets or work area stations will be double gang faceplates each with a standard bundle of 3each 

CAT5e UTP cables unless noted otherwise on the drawings. Unused connector jack opening shall be 

filled with blank inserts. Work area outlet shall be numbered per FDI standards and listed in the Outlet 

Schedule. An Outlet Schedule will be created in a spreadsheet format as part of the design documents. 

Two work area outlets will be provided in each office space and distributed in other locations based upon 

programming data developed unique to the building and its uses. 

Testing 

Installed cables, both copper and fiber optical, will be tested to the most current performance standards 

for the type of cable installed. 

4-pair UTP cables will be tested and results recorded to Category 5e performance standards. 

Multipair backbone (riser) cables will be tested to Category 3 performance standards for transmission 

along with continuity, shorts, crossed pairs, transposed pairs, split pairs, and conductor shorts to ground 

or the cable metallic shield. 

Fiber optical cables will be tested before install, after install, and after completely terminated for 

performance standards relative to the type of cable installed. 

Grounding 

The telecommunications grounding system shall be designed in accordance with the ANSI/TIA Joint 

Standard 607-A. A telecommunications main grounding busbar (TMGB) will be provided in each MDF 

Equipment Room and bonded to the building's main electrical service ground with a 3/0 grounding 

conductor. Equipment racks, cable tray, metallic conduits longer than 10-feet, cable runway, electrical 

circuit panel in the MDF along with other hardware shall be bonded to the TMGB using a #6 AWG 

grounding conductor. 

Audio Video Systems and Distribution Narrative 

The existing audio and video equipment is outdated and will need to be replaced except for a few pieces 

that have been recently purchased or donated. 



The lobby and public corridors will require a high quality public address and background music system 

with individual spaces zoned separately. The corridor "pathway" zones will require audio connectivity to 

adjacent exhibit activities. The lobby will be utilized for varying functions requiring audio and possibly 

video support for dinners, receptions and presentations. Audio and video equipment required to support 

these functions should be housed in a local casework mounted equipment rack and/or lectern as required 

for the space. Outlet boxes and raceway will be provided for all devices. 

The classrooms and meeting rooms will require basic presentation systems consisting of ceiling mounted 

projectors and projection screens, ceiling mounted speaker systems for speech reinforcement and wall 

mounted speakers for program material. Audio and video equipment required to support the presentation 

system should be housed in a local casework mounted equipment rack and/or lectern as required for the 

space. Provisions should be made for the addition of video conference or distance learning equipment if 

desired. Outlet boxes and raceway will be provided for all devices. 

The exhibit spaces will require a central audio video equipment room to house media sources, control and 

distribution equipment. Flexible or temporary exhibits could utilize local network connected digital media 

players located at projectors or flat panel displays and loudspeaker systems. Local control of the systems 

shall be provided over network connected control panels. All media distribution shall be provided over UTP 

Category 6 cabling. Flexible pathways shall be provided. 

Acoustical Systems Narrative 

Architectural Acoustics 

Architectural acoustics consists of the control of sound between spaces and the creation of desired 

acoustic environments within rooms. 

The interior acoustics of spaces within the Burke Museum are addressed with acoustically absorptive 

materials primarily on the ceilings. This approach will provide the desired acoustic environments by 

reducing reverberation or room response. The suggested area of coverage by space is presented below. 

Acoustical separation involves controlling the audibility of intruding sound with the architecture 

separating two adjacent spaces. Acoustical separation is directly related to the level of the intruding 

sound source, the capacity of the partition to block sound, and the ability of the background sound in the 

receiving room to mask the intruding sound. 

Within the Burke Museum project, the following areas deserve special attention: 

• Temporary Exhibit Space 

• Permanent Exhibit Space 

• Lobby 

• Meeting Rooms - Burke Room, Multi-purpose 

• Prep Rooms 

• Exhibit Shop 

The Exhibit Spaces and the Lobby will have hard, tall walls and hard floors, so acoustical absorption will 

need to cover most, if not all, of the ceiling. Acoustical material could be attached directly to the 

underside of the ceiling above, or could be suspended from the floor above to conceal ductwork and other 

infrastructure. Some acoustical absorption options are ductliner stick-pinned to the structure, stretched 

fabric covering semi-rigid fiberglass boards, or a monolithic gypsum board look-alike, such as 

NewAcoustic by Newmat, Claro/Ceilencio by Decoustics, or TechStyle by Hunter Douglas. Given the need 

for flexibility in this space and the audio component often included in these exhibits, the ceiling material 

will likely be thicker than a typical 1"-thick panel. 

For the Burke and Multi-purpose rooms, we recommend ACT ceilings. Since the Multi-purpose room is 

used for the K-12 outreach program, that room would benefit from acoustical wall panels on 2 adjacent 

walls. To provide adequate acoustic separation, the operable walls around these rooms should have a 

minimum STC rating of 52 and the fixed walls should be STC 50. 

The prep rooms are noisy spaces, with specimen preparation including drills, large vacuums, dremels and 

dust collectors. These rooms should also have acoustically absorptive ceilings, to reduce the 

reverberation in the room. This could be done with a cleanable acoustic tile. For acoustic separation, the 



walls between prep rooms should be STC 50 walls, and the walls to offices and the corridor should be STC 

55 walls. 

The Exhibit Shop is very noisy, with exhibit construction and preparation including band saws, chop saws, 

sanders and table saws. These rooms should also have acoustically absorptive ceilings, to reduce the 

reverberation in the room. This could be done with a cleanable acoustic tile, hanging baffles, or fiberglass 

behind perforated metal. We recommend double stud walls (STC-60) around the Exhibit Shop to provide 

acoustical separation from this noisy space. 

Mechanical System Noise and Vibration Control 

Criteria 

Background noise within occupied spaces consists of ventilation system noise, electrical system noise, 

exterior noises intruding into the room and noise created by the users. Noise created by the users can be 

due to overhead projectors and laptops and is not part of the building design. 

The acoustical design goal is the achievement of a level of background noise that is unobtrusive in quality 

(frequency content) and low enough in level (amplitude) that it does not interfere with the function of the 

space being served. To be unobtrusive the background noise should exhibit the following characteristics: 

• A balanced distribution of sound energy over a broad frequency range to create a sound that is 

bland in character. 

• No audible tonal characteristics such as a whine, hum or rumble. 

• No noticeable time-varying levels from system induced aerodynamic instability or air turbulence. 

The recommended background noise criteria for this project are as follows: 

Effective Utilization of Space 

Area Criteria 

Exhibit Spaces NC 35-40 

Lobby NC 35-40 

Meeting Rooms NC 25-30 

Offices NC 35-40 

Prep Rooms NC 40-45 

Exhibit Shop NC 40-45 

The purpose of the proposed renovation updates all the building systems and reconfigures the programs 

largely within the existing building envelope. There is only an increase of less than 1,500 gross square 

feet (GSF) to the estimated total of 70,319 GSF. The existing spaces are reconfigured to expand the 

exhibit area and make much more of the collections accessible to the public. The museum will also be 

more efficient for research, collection storage and museum operations. 

Cost Planning 

Cost planning considered costs of other recent projects on the Seattle campus and elsewhere. The 

preferred option was chosen because renovating the existing building is the most cost effective option. 

The Office of Financial Management’s cost control ranges do not include a category for museums. The 

total cost per gross square feet (GSF) is $747. However, the total budget includes costs for surge and 

exhibit fabrication. Although no state funds will be used for surge it was included in the budget to 

accurately account for total costs. New exhibits will be installed once the renovated Burke is substantially 

complete and are a cost outside of the standard construction contract. Subtracting these costs from the 

total project budget drops the costs/GSF to $643. 



Funding Sources 

State funding $35,000,000 

Non-state funding (donors and grants) $17,500,000 

GRAND TOTAL $52,500,000 



6.0 MASTER PLAN AND POLICY COORDINATION 

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON MASTER PLAN 

The Burke Museum Renovation project is consistent with the University of Washington Campus Master 

Plan, Seattle Campus, Approved Compiled Plan dated January, 2003. No changes are proposed to the 

Campus Master Plan as a result of this project. This plan is consistent with the City of Seattle and the 

Growth Management Act regulations. 

OTHER SIGNIFICANT STATE POLICIES 

Compliance with significant state policies may be demonstrated through a particular capital project or 

through overall campus capital improvements. 

Clean Air Act of 1991 

The University of Washington’s response to the Clean Air Act of 1991 is illustrated on a campus wide basis 

by capital improvements to the existing power plant and the University’s U-Pass program, which has 

resulted in a campus wide reduction in the number of single occupancy vehicle commuters. Measures to 

encourage commuting by non-automobiles are incorporated in each capital project through such measures 

as provisions for bicycle racks and safety improvements. Design standards for emissions and indoor air 

quality will be implemented in the building design stages as part of a comprehensive LEED strategy. 

Growth Management Act of 1990 

The Growth Strategies legislation of 1990 requires state agencies to comply with local land use regulations 

adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Act, which the University of Washington acknowledges 

through the development of the Campus Master Plan. 

Governor’s Executive Order 90-94 for Protection of Wetlands 

The University has surveyed the wetland areas on campus as required by the Growth Management Act and 

Governor’s Executive Order. Surveys were prepared for use during capital project planning to ensure that 

wetland resources remain protected. 

No wetlands or other environmentally sensitive areas will be affected by the project. 

Governor’s Executive Order 05-05 Archeological and Cultural Resources 

The University’s Campus Master Plans include guidelines for any project that makes exterior alterations to 

buildings over 50 years old, or is adjacent to a building or significant campus feature older than 50 years 

and public spaces identified in the plan. An Historic Resource Addendum (HRA) is prepared and becomes 

an attachment to all project documentation and will be considered by the appropriate decision makers. 

The information and analysis provided in the HRA provides a framework and context to ensure that 

important elements of the campus, its historic character and value, environmental considerations and 

landscape context are preserved, enhances, and valued. The HRA further ensures that improvements, 

changes, and modifications to the physical environment may be clearly analyzed and documented. 

Information contained in the HRA is based on Federal Department of Interior Guidelines. The HRA may 

identify the need for additional archeological consultation prior to and during construction activities. 

Chapter 39.35D RCW High-Performance Public Buildings 

The University of Washington implements environmental stewardship and sustainability principles and 

practices in the development and management of buildings and capital projects. Sustainable building is 

an integrated framework of design, construction, operations and demolition practices that encompasses 

the environmental, economic and social impacts of buildings. Sustainable design includes: efficient 

management of energy and water resources, management of materials and waste, protection of health and 

indoor environmental quality, protection of the environmental and reinforcement of natural systems, and 

an integrated design approach. State funded University projects will be designed, constructed, and 

certified to at least the LEED silver standard. 

Clean Water Act 

The University is incorporating storm water, drainage and erosion control plan requirements into its 

construction documents for all major capital projects. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permit requirements will be implemented through the installation and maintenance of drainage 

utility systems for each capital project. 

6-1 Master Plan and Policy Coordination 30 June 2010


Hazardous Substances 

Prior to occupancy, the University prepares an inventory of all hazardous substances to be utilized in the 

facility; a chemical hygiene plan is prepared for all employees. 

Government Options to Landfill Disposal (GOLD) 

The University’s Facility Design Information Manual requires that each capital project provide sufficient 

support service space for the storage, sorting and transport of recyclables. 

State Environmental Policy Act 

As the Lead Agency, the University of Washington will ensure compliance with the State Environmental 

Policy Act RCW 34.21C , WAC 197-11 and WAC 478 for all capital projects. 

6-2 Master Plan and Policy Coordination 30 June 2010


7.0 FACILITY OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS 

Operations and Maintenance Costs 

The following estimates for operations and maintenance costs for the Burke Museum are based on the 

“Report of Average Annual Cost per Gross Square Foot” for July 2008 to June 2009. For the renovated 

building, costs are escalated at an inflation rate of 3% per year beginning June 2010 through occupancy in 

October 2015. 

The renovated Burke Museum will receive the University’s normal level of campus operations and campus 

maintenance. In addition, energy management systems and electrical power supply will be designed in 

conformance to the University’s “Facilities Services Design Guide” which prescribes energy efficient 

systems. Although new and renovated buildings tend to have increased energy demands and operations 

costs due to more sophisticated technology, increased energy demand is anticipated to be offset by 

energy conservation measures being incorporated into the design. However, campus operations and 

maintenance costs continue to increase yearly. 

Campus operations and maintenance costs for the existing building are illustrated in Table 1 below. 

Campus operations and maintenance costs for the renovated building with the adjusted gross square 

footage is in Table 2 below. 

TABLE 1 

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 

EXISTING BUILDING CONDITIONS 

OPERATING 

COSTS GSF 

JUNE 

2010 

OPERATIONS 

GSF/YEAR COST 

OPERATIONS AND 

MAINTENANCE (O&M) 

AVP Facilities Services 

Finance and Business 

0.1154 

Services 0.0905 

Campus Engineering 0.1338 

Custodial Services 1.2466 

Building Maintenance 1.0693 

Work Management 0.1385 

Campus Operations 0.6388 

Grounds Maintenance 0.2042 

TOTAL O&M 3.6372 67,245 244,584 

UTILITIES 3.0041 67,245 202,011 

TRANSPORTATION 

SERVICES 0.0413 67,245 2,777 

TOTAL ANNUAL COST 

EXISTING 6.6826 67,245 $449,372 

7-1 Facility Operations and Maintenance RequirementsDraft 30 June 2010


TABLE 2 

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 

RENOVATED BUILDING 

OPERATING 

COSTS GSF 

JUNE 

2010 ESCALATION 

OCTOBER 

2015 

OPERATIONS 

GSF/YEAR COST FACTOR COST 

ADMINISTRATION 

AVP Facilities Services 

Finance and Business 

0.1154 

Services 0.0905 

Campus Engineering 0.1338 

Custodial Services 1.2466 

Building Maintenance 1.0693 

Work Management 0.1385 

Campus Operations 0.6388 

Grounds Maintenance 0.2042 

TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 3.6372 70,319 255,764 1.1709 299,474 

UTILITIES 3.0041 70,319 211,245 1.1709 247,347 

TRANSPORTATION 

SERVICES 0.0413 70,319 2,904 1.1709 3,400 

TOTAL ANNUAL COST 

RENOVATED 6.6826 70,319 $469,913 1.1709 $550,221 

7-2 Facility Operations and Maintenance RequirementsDraft 30 June 2010


8.0 Project Drawings and Diagrams 

Building Plans/Sections 

Site Plan Narrative 

Site Plan 

8-1 Project Drawings and Diagrams 30 June 2010
















Site Plan 

The site plan represents the approximate size and location of exterior elements relative to the building. 

The design is conceptual and will require further study. 

Three significant outdoor gathering areas are identified in the site plan. The first is on the east side of the 

Museum at first floor level. This space is contained by a retaining wall on the east and north edges that 

would screen the area from the loading dock and potentially from Memorial way, if desirable. A rolling 

gate or movable wall on the south edge would allow the space to be closed off for private events or secure 

outdoor exhibits. A walkway and stairs from the second floor of the building would allow direct access 

from the interior exhibit area of the museum. The walkway would provide a covered area for school 

groups and small events. This open space could be programmed with a variety of ongoing activities such 

as long-term artist in residence studio space, large scale sculpture elements/outdoor exhibits, an outdoor 

classroom, and formal event space. The Erna Gunther Ethnobotanical Garden could be located in this plaza 

within a series of contained garden beds. The Garden should be large enough to include a diverse plant 

collection but small enough to be easily maintained by Museum staff. There is potential for the Garden to 

be used as a teaching tool and will be designed to facilitate this use. Exact Garden dimensions will be 

studied in consultation with Museum staff. The total area of the east exterior program area is about 8300 

square feet. 

An entry plaza on the south side of the building responds to the relocation of the Museum lobby to the 

southwest corner of the building. As it is one of the most desirable places to sit throughout the year, a 

variety of seating options would be provided such as benches, tables, and movable chairs. This area could 

be used to display the geological artifacts currently in the café seating area. A vegetative buffer screens 

the plaza from the vehicular drop off zone. A bike shelter is located on the east side of this area. Per the 

City of Seattle bicycle parking requirements, one rack should be provided for each 4,000 square feet of 

floor area. For this project, a minimum of 18 bike racks would be required. The total size of the entry 

plaza is approximately 3500 square feet. 

A third open space is under the proposed building cantilever and along the west side of the Museum. The 

current loading dock and parking lot has been removed and raised approximately three feet to the first 

floor level of the Museum. This reduces the need for long ramps and stairways to the north and south of 

the new plaza space and allows a direct connection to the Musem lobby. This event plaza includes a large 

specimen tree to provide shade and shelter, a screen wall on the south and west sides of the space and a 

wide stairway below the new building cantilever. The stairs could function as theater seating for events 

occurring in the space. This plaza has a direct connection to the Museum lobby and would allow for large 

events where guests could move easily from interior to exterior spaces. The total area of the event plaza is 

approximately 9800 square feet. This would allow events of up to 400 people to occur in the plaza. 

The west parking lot has been replaced by a parking lot to the north of the Museum. A two-way drive aisle 

with 90 degree parking allows 42 stalls to be located in this area resulting in a gain of about 13 parking 

stalls. Locating the parking lot in this area addresses many of the current safety hazards. The parking lot 

would eliminate illegal camping and would significantly increase visibility in this area. This parking area is 

surrounded by a sloped retaining wall and a pedestrian path directly north of the Museum. Stairs connect 

this path to the loading dock and the existing pedestrian pathways at the northeast corner of the site. 





Appendix 

A. Predesign Checklist 

B. Project Participants 

C. Form C-4, Predesign Capital Project Request Report 

D. CBS 360 Cost Estimate Summary 

E. Project Budget Detail 

F. Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

G. Collins Philanthropic Funding Feasibility Report Highlights 

H. Sustainability Workshop Notes 

I. LEED for New Construction v2.2 Checklist 

J. Environmental Design Consideration Form 

Appendix Draft 22 June 2010


Predesign Checklist 

⌧ Executive Summary 

⌧ Project Analysis 

⌧ Discussion of operational needs 

⌧ Discussion of alternatives 

⌧ Discussion of selected alternative 

⌧ Identification of issues 

⌧ Prior planning and history 

⌧ Stakeholders 

⌧ Project description 

⌧ Implementation approach 

⌧ Project management 

⌧ Schedule 

⌧ Program Analysis 

⌧ Assumptions 

⌧ Functions and FTEs 

⌧ Spatial relationships between facility and site (see Site Analysis) 

⌧ Interrelationships and adjacencies of functions 

⌧ Major equipment 

⌧ Special systems such as environmental, information technology, etc. 

⌧ Future needs and flexibility 

⌧ Sustainability and energy utilization 

⌧ Applicable codes and regulations 

⌧ Site Analysis 

⌧ Potential sites (not applicable) 

⌧ Building footprint 

⌧ Site considerations such as physical, regulatory and access issues 

⌧ Acquisition process (not applicable) 

⌧ Project Budget Analysis 


⌧ Detailed estimates 

⌧ Funding sources 

⌧ Project cost estimate 

⌧ Form C-3, Benefit and Life Cycle Cost Analysis Summary 

⌧ Sign-off by agency 

⌧ Master Plan and Policy Coordination 

⌧ Impacts to existing plans 

⌧ Adherence to significant state policies 

⌧ Facility Operations and Maintenance Requirements 


⌧ Operating costs in table form 

⌧ Staffing plan (capital and operating) 

⌧ Project Drawings/ Diagrams 

⌧ Site plans 

⌧ Building plans 

⌧ Building volumes 

⌧ Elevations (not applicable) 

⌧ Appendix 

⌧ Predesign Checklist 

⌧ Project budget unit cost detail 

⌧ Sustainable design charette summary 

⌧ Additional information as needed 

Appendix Predesign Checklist Draft 22 June 2010


Project Participants 

Building Committee / University of Washington 

Julie Stein, Director, Burke Museum, Chair 

Andrew Whiteman, Senior Curator of Exhibits, Designer, Burke Museum 

Denis Martynowych, Principal Planner, Office of Planning & Budgeting 

Diane Quinn, Director of Education, Burke Museum 

Erin Younger, Associate Director, Burke Museum 

Laura Phillips, Archaeology Collections Manager, Burke Museum 

Leita Bain, Director of Facilities, College of Arts and Sciences 

Mary Dunnam, President, Burke Museum Association 

Richard Olmstead, Associate Director of Research, Curator of Botany, Burke Museum 

Christian A. Sidor, Curator, Vertebrate Paleontology, Burke Museum 

Sarah Tollefson, Facilities Manager, Burke Museum 

Ex officio: 

Butch Kuecks, Assistant Director, Campus Engineering 

Peter Dewey, Facilities Planning Officer, Facilities Services 

Randy Everett, Project Manager, Capital Project Office 

Other Participants / University of Washington 

John Palewicz, Interim Director, Program Management, Capital Projects Office 

Clara Simon, Sustainability Manager, Capital Projects Office 

Kristine Kenney, University Landscape Architect, Capital Projects Office 

John Barker, Senior Projects Estimator, Capital Projects Office 

Kristine Erickson, Project Controls Engineer, Capital Projects Office 

Pam Stewart, Executive Director, Planning & Facilities, UW Information Technology 

Noah Pitzer, Network Specialist, UWTV UW Technology 

Anna O’Donnell, Director of Development, Burke Museum 

Erin Feeney, Development & Membership, Burke Museum 

MaryAnn Barron Wagner, Communications Director, Burke Museum 

Rob Faucett, Collections Manager, Ornithology, Burke Museum 

Ellen Ferguson, Community Relations Director, Burke Museum 

Leslie Jones, Human Resources Manager, Burke Museum 

Liz Nesbitt, Curator, Invertebrate Paleontology, Burke Museum 

Ruth Pelz, Manager, Foundation and Corporate Relations, Burke Museum 

Brian Richards, Director of Visitor Services, Burke Museum 

Carl Sander, Public Programs Manager, Burke Museum 

Robin Wright, Curator, Native American Art, Burke Museum 

Olson Kundig Architects 

Tom Kundig, Design Principal 

Stephen Yamada-Heidner, Project Manager 

Edward LaLonde, Project Architect 

Rick Sundberg, Programming and Planning Advisor 

Consultants Team 

Drew Gangnes, Civil Engineer, Magnusson Klemencic 

Rita Greene, Civil Engineer, Magnusson Klemencic 

Scott Murase, Landscape Architect, Murase Associates 

Liz Wreford Taylor, Landscape Architect, Murase Associates 

Greg Briggs, Structural Engineer, Magnusson Klemencic 

Tom Marseille, Mechanical Engineer, WSP Flack and Kurtz 

Henry DiGregorio, Mechanical Engineer, WSP Flack and Kurtz 

Jim Redding, Electrical Engineer, Sparling 

Richard D. Erwin, Audio Video Technologies, Sparling 

Michael Yantis, Acoustic Engineer, Sparling 

Steve Kelly, Cost Estimator, Davis Langdon 

Katrina Morgan, Sustainability Consultant, Fermata Consulting 

Project Participants 30 June 2010

PREDESIGN CAPITAL PROJECT REQUEST REPORT SUMMARY 

AGENCY NAME University of Washington AGENCY CODE 

(Rev. 6/01) 

PROJECT TITLE TYPE 

360 

PROJECT NUMBER 

Burke Museum Renovation Renovation 20082850 

PLAN PRIORITY OFM PRIORITY PREVIOUSLY COUNTY CITY LEGISLATIVE DIST. 

10 King Seattle 43 

WAS PROJECT INCLUDED IN PRIOR 10 YEARS? 

S?PLAN? (9) 

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

a. Problem/Justification/Why is this project needed? 

Yes IF YES, WHEN? 2009 PREV. PROJECT # 

Project Mgmt by GA? No 

The Burke Museum is the Washington State Museum responsible for the care of state collections of natural and cultural 

heritage. More than a century of dedication to this mission has resulted in nationally recognized collections, research, 

exhibits, education, and public programs across all disciplines of the museum. This project will develop a design plan to 

ensure that the resources of the museum are protected, publicly accessible, and the facilities are adequate for meaningful 

public presentations. There is limited capacity in the current facility for existing and additional collections/exhibits. The current 

facility does not have adequate climate controls, meeting facilities, public elevator, storage space, exhibit space, work space 

or adequate accessible amenities. 

b. Proposed Solution/Benefit to public 

service, strategic goals? 

Complies w/GMA? Yes 

The project is to renovate the Burke Museum. This project will address current limitations and shortcomings of the facilities. 

The project will address pressing issues including, but not limited to the following: adequate climate controls to protect and 

preserve collections of natural and cultural heritage; facilities, such as exhibit, meeting, classroom, public program 

presentation, viewing and storage spaces, to provide appropriate security, space and access; and adequate storage and 

workshop space to support the museum’s increasingly active creation of on-site and traveling exhibits and education 

resources. The project will also address infrastructure, mechanical, electrical, seismic, life safety, and accessibility 

deficiencies in the current museum building 

c. Predesign Issues 

• Substantially enhance the visitor experience with new exhibits and new opportunities to view and understand 

collections-based research in the museum. 

• Revitalize and renew the existing building to preserve, protect, and support research and public interactions with the 

collections. 

• Have the building itself be opportunity to educate visitors about protecting the natural and cultural heritage of the 

earth. Achieve Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating of gold or higher. 

RELATED COSTS Operating budget costs/savings required for this project including staff and cost of 

maintenance 

FTE; / $ per fiscal year 

PROJECT STATISTICS 

PROJECT LIFE Net Project Size (sq. ft.) 48,450 Gross Project Size (sq. ft.) 70,319 Const Cost Per Gross Square Foot $341 

New Remodel New Remode New Remodel 

Building Type: Masonry Frame PROJECT SCHEDULE (20) ADJUSTED CAPITAL COST 

Project Phases 

ACQUISITION COSTS 

BASE COST (7/02) START COMPLETE % COST 

DESIGN CONSULTANT SERVICES 

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT COSTS: 

4,575,911 7/1/2011 6/30/2013 7.2 $4,906,138 

MACC $25,001,224 $27,959,387 

10.7% Contingency $2,679,379 $2,996,405 

9.8% TAX $2,712,699 $3,033,667 

CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $30,393,302 7/1/2013 1/1/2015 11.8 $33,989,459 

EQUIPMENT (include tax) $4,909,146 11.8 $5,490,000 

ARTWORK $71,807 0 $71,807 

OTHER COSTS $5,047,172 9.0 $5,500,201 

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION $2,542,395$ $2,542,395 

TOTAL COST $47,539,733 10.4 $52,500,000

ANALYSIS DATE: June 30, 2010 ABBREVIATIONS 

PREPARED BY: Denis Martynowych, Principal Planner 

PHONE NUMBER: 206 543-7466 

A. ROOM TYPES ASF N FTE WSH RUR SOR 

Classroom 875 34 275 1300 35 65% 

Dry Lab 17425 n\a n\a n\a 60 n\a 

Wet Lab 1500 n\a n\a n\a 60 n\a 

Computer Lab 0 n\a n\a n\a n\a n\a 

Faculty Office 1820 n\a n\a n\a 60 n\a 

Student Assembly 0 n\a n\a n\a n\a n\a 

Non-Assignable Rooms 6575 n\a n\a n\a n\a n\a 

B. OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS $/YEAR 

Utilities n\a 

Custodial 

Maintenance 

Security 

Landscaping and Ground Maintenance 

Liability and Hazard Insurance 

Tenant Improvements 

Capital Maintenance 

Management Fees 

Furniture 

Moving Expenses 

Telephone 

Data Processing 

Other Equipment 

Total O&M Cost $0 

Assignable Sq Feet (ASF) 

Full-Time Equivalent Student (FTE) 

Weekly Student Hours (WSH) = student hours per week in room 

Room Utilization Rate (RUR) = hours per week room is scheduled for use 

Number of Stations (N) = desks or lab stations 

Station Occupancy Ratio (SOR) = percent of stations used during scheduled use 

OPERATING IMPACT 

Est. Total 2001-03 2003-05 2005-07 2007-09 2009-11 20011-13 

Annual Average FTEs (#) $ n\a 

General Fund-State $ 

Total Funds $ 

PROJECT FUNDING 

ESTIMATED TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2009-11 FISCAL PERIOD 

FUND CODE(S) TOTAL COST Prior Biennium (07-09) Current Biennium Reappropriation New Appropriation 

057 35,000,000 $300,000 $ $300,000 $ 

252 17,500,000 FUTURE FISCAL PERIODS 

2011-13 2013-15 2015-17 2017-19 

$5,000,000 $47,200,000 $0 $0

OFM 

Cost Estimate Number: 

Cost Estimate Title: 

Version: 

Project Number: 

Project Title: 

Project Phase Title: 

72 

Burke Museum Renovation June 2010 

01 draft 

20082850 

Burke Museum Renovation 

360 - University of Washington 


2011-13 Biennium 

* 

Agency Preferred: 

Report Number: CBS003 

Date Run: 6/29/2010 3:33PM 

Contact Info Contact Name: Randy Everett Contact Number: 206.543.8776 

Statistics 

Gross Sq. Ft.: 

70,319 

Usable Sq. Ft.: 48,450 

Space Efficiency: 

69% 

MACC Cost per Sq. Ft.: 302 

Escalated MACC Cost per Sq. Ft.: 

Remodel? 

Construction Type: 

A/E Fee Class: 

A/E Fee Percentage: 

341 

Yes 

Museums 

A 

10.14% 

Schedule Start Date End Date 

Predesign: 

Design: 

Construction: 

04-2009 

07-2011 

10-2013 

05-2010 

06-2013 

03-2015 

Duration of Construction (Months): 

Cost Summary Escalated 

17 

Acquisition Costs Total 0 

Pre-Schematic Design Services 230,370 

Construction Documents 1,909,210 

Extra Services 1,177,767 

Other Services 956,997 

Design Services Contingency 631,833 

Consultant Services Total 4,906,178 

Site work 0 

Related Project Costs 0 

Facility Construction 23,970,796 

Construction Contingencies 2,996,349 

Non Taxable Items 0 

Sales Tax 3,033,706 

Construction Contracts Total 33,989,889 

Maximum Allowable Construction Cost(MACC) 23,970,796 

Equipment 5,000,000 

Non Taxable Items 0 

Sales Tax 490,000 

Equipment Total 5,490,000 

Art Work Total 80,471 

Other Costs Total 5,500,000 

Project Management Total 2,533,462 

Grand Total Escalated Costs 52,500,000 

Rounded Grand Total Escalated Costs 

Additional Details 

Alternative Public Works Project: 

1 

Yes 

Yes 

52,500,000

OFM 



Version: 




72 


01 draft 

20082850 





* 

Agency Preferred: 


Date Run: 6/29/2010 3:33PM 


Additional Details 

State Construction Inflation Rate: 3.00% 

Base Month and Year: 

Project Administration By: 

Project Admin Impact to GA that is NOT Included in Project Total: 

2 

06-2010 

AGY 

$0 

Yes

OFM 



Detail Title: 




72 


Burke June 2010 

20082850 


Location: Seattle, King County 


Cost Estimate Detail 


* 

Analysis Date: 

June 29, 2010 


Statistics 

Gross Sq. Ft.: 

Usable Sq. Ft.: 

Rentable Sq. Ft.: 

Space Efficiency: 

Escalated MACC Cost per Sq. Ft.: 

Escalated Cost per S. F. Explanation 

Construction Type: 

Remodel? 

A/E Fee Class: 

A/E Fee Percentage: 

Contingency Rate: 

Contingency Explanation 

Management Reserve: 

Projected Life of Asset (Years): 

Location Used for Tax Rate: 

Tax Rate: 

Art Requirement Applies: 

Project Administration by: 

Higher Education Institution?: 

Alternative Public Works?: 

70,319 

48,450 

69% 

341 

Museums 

Yes 

A 

10.14% 

10.00% 

2.50% 

40 

Seattle, King County 

9.80% 

Yes 

AGY 

Yes 

Yes 

Project Schedule Start Date End Date 

Predesign: 

04-2009 

Design: 

07-2011 

Construction: 

10-2013 

Duration of Construction (Months): 17 

State Construction Inflation Rate: 

Base Month and Year: 

Project Cost Summary 

MACC: 

MACC (Escalated): 

Current Project Total: 

Rounded Current Project Total: 

Escalated Project Total: 

Rounded Escalated Project Total: 

3.00% 

6-2010 

$ 21,269,562 

$ 23,970,796 

$ 47,167,246 

$ 47,167,000 

$ 52,499,999 

$ 52,500,000 

05-2010 

06-2013 

03-2015 

3

ITEM Base Amount Sub Total 

CONSULTANT SERVICES 

Escalation 

Factor 

Escalated 

Cost 

Pre-Schematic Design Services 

Programming/Site Analysis 223,119 

SubTotal: Pre-Schematic Design Services 223,119 1.0325 230,370 

Construction Documents 

A/E Basic Design Services 1,797,411 

SubTotal: Construction Documents 1,797,411 1.0622 1,909,210 

Extra Services 

Civil Design (Above Basic Services) 60,000 

Geotechnical Investigation 45,000 

Commissioning (Systems Check) 60,000 

Site Survey 50,000 

Testing 85,000 

Leadership Energy & Environment Design List(LEED) 170,000 

Voice/Data Consultant 25,000 

Environmental Mitigation Services (EIS) 100,000 

Landscape Consultant 40,000 

Specialty Consultants 235,000 

Document Reproduction 70,000 

GC/CM Selection Process/Review 5,000 

Graphics 20,000 

Permit Expeditor 15,000 

Renderings, Presentations & Models 20,000 

Other 108,800 

SubTotal: Extra Services 1,108,800 1.0622 1,177,767 

Other Services 

Bid/Construction/Closeout 734,154 

Staffing 75,000 

As Builts 10,000 

Cost & Schedule Consultant 20,000 

Small Contract (Attorneys, DRB) 10,000 

SubTotal: Other Services 849,154 1.1270 956,997 

Design Services Contingency 

Design Services Contingency 397,848 

Change Order Design Allowance 162,785 

SubTotal: Design Services Contingency 560,633 1.1270 631,833 

Total: Consultant Services 

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 

4,539,117 

1.0809 

4,906,178 

Facility Construction 

Complete Facilities 21,269,562 

SubTotal: Facility Construction 21,269,562 1.1270 23,970,796 

Maximum Allowable Construction Cost (MACC) 21,269,562 1.1300 23,970,796 

GCCM Risk Contingency 

GCCM Risk Contingency 514,876 

SubTotal: GCCM Risk Contingency 514,876 1.1270 580,265 

GCCM or Design Build Costs 

GCCM Fee 913,132 

Bid General Conditions 850,721 

GCCM Preconstruction Services 402,389 

Negotiated Support Services 858,401 

SubTotal: GCCM or Design Build Costs 3,024,643 1.1270 3,408,773 

Construction Contingencies 

4

ITEM Base Amount Sub Total 

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 

Escalation 

Factor 

Escalated 

Cost 

Management Reserve 531,739 

Allowance for Change Orders 2,126,956 

SubTotal: Construction Contingencies 2,658,695 1.1270 2,996,349 

Sales Tax 2,691,842 1.1270 3,033,706 

Total: Construction Contracts 

EQUIPMENT 

30,159,618 

1.1270 

33,989,889 

E10 - Equipment 433,277 

E20 - Furnishings 433,280 

F10 - Special Construction 3,570,000 

SubTotal: 4,436,557 1.1270 5,000,000 

Sales Tax 434,783 1.1270 490,000 

Total: Equipment 4,871,340 1.1270 

5,490,000 

ART WORK 

Higher Ed Artwork 119,851 

Artwork Correction (39,383) 

Total: Art Work 80,471 1.0000 

80,471 

OTHER COSTS 

Mitigation Costs 20,000 

Permits & Fees 270,000 

Connectivity 158,000 

In Plant Services 177,000 

Temporary Facilities 619,500 

Builders Risk 73,788 

Capitalized Operating Expense 3,625,950 

Financing Costs 39,000 

Total: Other Costs 4,983,238 1.1037 

5,500,000 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT 

Agency Project Management 2,963,611 

PM Fee Correction (474,599) 

Pre Active Project Management 44,450 

Total: Project Management 2,533,462 1.0000 

2,533,462 

5

OFM 



Parameter 

72 

Associated or Unassociated 

Biennium 

Agency 

Version 

Project Classification 

Capital Project Number 

Cost Estimate Number 

Sort Order 

User Group 


Cost Estimate Summary and Detail 

Entered As 

2011-13 

360 

01-A 

* 

20082850 

Number 


* 

Interpreted As 

Associated Associated 

72 

Agency Budget 

2011-13 

360 

01-A 


Date Run: 6/29/2010 3:33PM 

All Project Classifications 

20082850 

72 

Number 

Agency Budget 

User Id * All User Ids 

6

Burke Museum Conceptual Cost Model 

Renovation and Addition June 17, 2010 

Seattle, Washington 027-7713.110 

BASIS OF COST MODEL 

Cost Model Prepared From Dated Received 

Drawings issued for Conceptual Cost Plan 

Architectural 

Floor plans A2.00, A2.01, A2.02, A2.02M Undated 06.01.10 

Landscape 

Site plan 05.25.10 05.26.10 

Discussions with the Project Architect and Engineers 

Page 1




BASIS OF COST MODEL 

Conditions of Construction 

The pricing is based on the following general conditions of construction 

A start date of July 2013 

A construction period of 18 months 

The general contract will be competitively bid with qualified general and main 

subcontractors 

There will not be small business set aside requirements 

The contractor will be required to pay prevailing wages 

There are no phasing requirements 

The general contractor will have full access to the site during normal business 

Page 2




INCLUSIONS 

This report considers the potential cost for a renovation and modest expansion for the Burke 

Museum in Seattle, Washington. 

The existing building area is 65,000 sf on three levels (plus mezzanine) and the proposed 

additions total 5,319 sf. 

Site/landscape costs include development of areas to the south and east of the existing building. 

Page 3




INCLUSIONS 

BIDDING PROCESS - MARKET CONDITIONS 

This document is based on the measurement and pricing of quantities wherever information is 

provided and/or reasonable assumptions for other work not covered in the drawings or 

specifications, as stated within this document. Unit rates have been obtained from historical records 

and/or discussion with contractors. The unit rates reflect current bid costs in the area. All unit rates 

relevant to subcontractor work include the subcontractors overhead and profit unless otherwise 

stated. The mark-ups cover the costs of field overhead, home office overhead and profit and range 

from 15% to 25% of the cost for a particular item of work. 

Pricing reflects probable construction costs obtainable in the project locality on the date of this 

statement of probable costs. This estimate is a determination of fair market value for the 

construction of this project. It is not a prediction of low bid. Pricing assumes competitive bidding for 

every portion of the construction work for all subcontractors, with 8 to 10 bidders for all items of 

subcontracted work. Experience indicates that a fewer number of bidders may result in higher bids, 

conversely an increased number of bidders may result in more competitive bids. 

Since Davis Langdon has no control over the cost of labor, material, equipment, or over the 

contractor's method of determining prices, or over the competitive bidding or market conditions at the 

time of bid, the statement of probable construction cost is based on industry practice, professional 

experience and qualifications, and represents Davis Langdon's best judgment as professional 

construction consultant familiar with the construction industry. However, Davis Langdon cannot and 

does not guarantee that the proposals, bids, or the construction cost will not vary from opinions of 

probable cost prepared by them them. 

Page 4




EXCLUSIONS 

Owner supplied and installed furniture, fixtures and equipment 

Loose furniture and equipment except as specifically identified 

Security equipment and devices 

Audio visual equipment 

Hazardous material handling, disposal and abatement 

Compression of schedule, premium or shift work, and restrictions on the contractor's working 

hours 

Testing and inspection fees 

Architectural, design and construction management fees 

Scope change and post contract contingencies 

Assessments, taxes, finance, legal and development charges 

Environmental impact mitigation 

Builder's risk, project wrap-up and other owner provided insurance program 

Land and easement acquisition 

Cost escalation beyond the construction midpoint of April 2014 

Page 5




OVERALL SUMMARY 

Gross Floor 

Area $ / SF $x1,000 

Building 70,319 SF 360.98 25,383 

TOTAL Building & Sitework Construction 70,319 SF 360.98 25,383 

Sitework 18,911 SF 2,575 

TOTAL Building & Sitework Construction July 2013 27,959 

C-100 ALTERNATE SUMMARY 

Escalated Primary MACC 

23,788 

Escalated GC/CM Costs 4,171 

TOTAL Building & Sitework Construction July 2013 27,959 

Please refer to the Inclusions and Exclusions sections of this report 

Page 6

Burke Museum Renovation and Addition Conceptual Cost Model 

Building June 17, 2010 


BUILDING AREAS & CONTROL QUANTITIES 

Areas 

SF SF SF 

Enclosed Areas 

New 

Basement 740 

First Floor 2,194 

Second Floor 2,210 

Second Floor Mezzanine 

Renovation 

175 

Basement 22,496 

First Floor 22,325 

Second Floor 19,619 

Second Floor Mezzanine 560 

SUBTOTAL, Enclosed Area 70,319 

Covered area 

SUBTOTAL, Covered Area @ ½ Value 

TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA 70,319 

Control Quantities 

Ratio to Gross 

Area 

Number of stories (x1,000) 3 EA 0.043 

Gross Area 70,319 SF 1.000 

Enclosed Area 70,319 SF 1.000 

Covered Area 0 SF 0.000 

Footprint Area 24,519 SF 0.349 

Volume 1,125,104 CF 16.000 

Basement Volume 371,776 CF 5.287 

Gross Wall Area 51,309 SF 0.730 

Retaining Wall Area 14,177 SF 0.202 

Finished Wall Area 38,167 SF 0.543 

Windows or Glazing Area 31.10% 15,956 SF 0.227 

Roof Area - Flat 24,690 SF 0.351 

Roof Area - Sloping 0 SF 0.000 

Roof Area - Total 24,690 SF 0.351 

Roof Glazing Area 0 SF 0.000 

Interior Partition Length 3,063 LF 0.044 

Finished Area 70,319 SF 1.000 

Elevators (x10,000) 2 EA 0.284 

Page 7




BUILDING COMPONENT SUMMARY 

Gross Area: 70,319 SF 

$/SF $x1,000 

1. Foundations 3.45 242 

2. Vertical Structure 5.19 365 

3. Floor & Roof Structures 5.58 393 

4. Exterior Cladding 34.62 2,435 

5. Roofing, Waterproofing & Skylights 2.41 169 

Shell (1-5) 51.25 3,604 

6. Interior Partitions, Doors & Glazing 12.40 872 

7. Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 25.66 1,804 

Interiors (6-7) 38.06 2,676 

8. Function Equipment & Specialties 13.21 929 

9. Stairs & Vertical Transportation 2.63 185 

Equipment & Vertical Transportation (8-9) 15.84 1,114 

10 Plumbing Systems 11.73 825 

11 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 65.61 4,614 

12 Electric Lighting, Power & Communications 52.38 3,683 

13 Fire Protection Systems 3.47 244 

Mechanical & Electrical (10-13) 133.19 9,366 

Total Building Construction (1-13) 238.33 16,759 

14 Site Preparation & Demolition 0.00 0 

15 Site Paving, Structures & Landscaping 0.00 0 

16 Utilities on Site 0.00 0 

Total Site Construction (14-16) 0.00 0 

TOTAL BUILDING & SITE (1-16) 238.33 16,759 

Contingency for Development of Design 15.00% 35.75 2,514 


Subcontractor Bonds 1.00% 2.74 193 

MACC Contingency 2.50% 6.93 487 

Negotiated Support Services 3.50% 9.93 698 

Specified General Conditions 3.00% 8.82 620 

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONSTRUCTION COST 302.50 21,271 

Preconstruction Services 450 

GC/CM Fee, Bonds 4.50% 13.89 977 

RECOMMENDED BUDGET 322.79 22,698 

Escalation to Midpoint (April 2014) 11.83% 38.18 2,685 

\ 

RECOMMENDED BUDGET July 2013 360.98 25,383 

Page 8




CSI Item Description Quantity Unit Rate Total 

1. Foundations 

Expansion 

Excavation 

Excavation for basement expansion 750 CY 25.00 18,750 

Fill 

Backfill against new retaining walls 250 CY 25.00 6,250 

Reinforced concrete including excavation 

Regular pad and strip foundations for new 

building 5,319 SF 15.00 79,785 

New elevator pit 1 EA 10,000.00 10,000 

Renovation 

Reinforced concrete including excavation 

Footing strengthening allowance 22,496 SF 5.00 112,480 

Subsurface drainage 

Perimeter foundation drainage 753 LF 20.00 15,060 

2. Vertical Structure 

242,325 

Expansion 

Columns and pilasters 

Steel columns - allow 6 lbs per sf 16 T 2,750.00 44,000 

Loadbearing walls 

Concrete core walls at elevator shaft 2,600 SF 60.00 156,000 

Fireproofing on steelwork 

Sprayed fireproofing to structural steel 16 T 225.00 3,600 

Renovation 

Columns and pilasters 

Column strengthening allowance 64,440 SF 2.50 161,100 

3. Floor and Roof Structure 

364,700 

Expansion 

Floor on grade 

Concrete slab on grade 1,490 SF 8.00 11,920 

Page 9





Connect new and existing slabs 199 LF 35.00 6,965 

Suspended floors 

Steel framing at 18 lbs per sf 34 T 2,750.00 93,500 

Concrete topped steel deck 3,829 SF 8.00 30,632 

Expansion joints 413 LF 125.00 51,625 

Flat roofs 



Expansion joints 314 LF 125.00 39,250 

Fireproofing steelwork 

Sprayed fireproofing to structural steel 47 T 225.00 10,575 

Miscellaneous 

Miscellaneous metals 5,319 SF 0.75 3,989 

Renovation 

Mechanical equipment platform 



Miscellaneous metals 65,000 SF 0.75 48,750 

4. Exterior Cladding 

392,626 

Expansion 

Wall framing, furring and insulation 

CMU back up to opaque walls 2,223 SF 15.00 33,345 

Furring and rigid insulation to CMU back up 2,223 SF 4.50 10,004 

Steel studs with batt insulation 2,223 SF 5.50 12,227 

Applied exterior finishes 

Brick rain screen system 2,223 SF 35.00 77,805 

Brick screen on structural steel armature 5,250 SF 50.00 262,500 

Interior finish to exterior walls 

Drywall to interior face of exterior walls 2,223 SF 1.25 2,779 

Windows and glazing 

New glazing 8,892 SF 75.00 666,900 

Exterior doors, frames and hardware 

Glazed aluminum entry doors - per leaf 4 EA 2,500.00 10,000 

Hollow metal doors 4 EA 1,500.00 6,000 

Fascias, bands, screens and trim etc. 

Allow for detailing 11,115 SF 1.50 16,673 

Page 10





Soffits 

Linear metal soffit to overhang 600 SF 35.00 21,000 

Renovation 

Wall framing, furring and insulation 

Furring and rigid insulation to basement 

retaining walls 12,711 SF 4.50 57,200 

Steel studs with batt insulation 27,052 SF 5.50 148,786 

Drywall to interior face of exterior walls 

Structural steel armature attached to existing 

39,763 SF 1.25 49,704 

building 

13,075 SF 25.00 326,875 

Brick screen infill 

Windows and glazing 

13,075 SF 25.00 326,875 

New glazing 

Exterior doors, frames and hardware 

7,019 SF 55.00 386,045 

Glazed aluminum entry doors 8 EA 2,500.00 20,000 

5. Roofing, Waterproofing & Skylights 

2,434,716 

Expansion 

Waterproofing walls below grade 

Retaining walls 1,466 SF 8.00 11,728 


New EPDM roofing on rigid insulation 1,490 SF 20.00 29,800 

Roofing upstands and sheetmetal 

Flashings and sheet metal 1,490 SF 1.50 2,235 

Caulking and sealants 

Caulking and sealants to exterior cladding 11,115 SF 0.50 5,558 

Firestopping 5,319 SF 0.25 1,330 

Renovation 


New EPDM roofing on rigid insulation 5,400 SF 15.00 81,000 

Roofing upstands and sheetmetal 

Flashings and sheet metal 5,400 SF 1.50 8,100 

Caulking and sealants 

Caulking and sealants to exterior cladding 39,763 SF 0.50 19,882 

Page 11





Firestopping 65,000 SF 0.15 9,750 

6. Interior Partitions, Doors & Glazing 

169,382 

Expansion 

Partition framing and cores 

New insulated drywall partitions 3,483 SF 8.00 27,864 

Balustrades and rails 

Railings 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 

Window walls and borrowed lights 

Interior glazing - allow 10% of total 348 SF 35.00 12,180 

Interior doors, frames and hardware 

New interior doors per leaf 4 EA 2,500.00 10,000 

Miscellaneous 

Rough carpentry 5,319 SF 0.50 2,660 

Renovation 

Partition framing and cores 

New insulated drywall partitions 54,644 SF 8.00 437,152 

Special partitions 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 

Balustrades and rails 

Railings 110 LF 350.00 38,500 

Window walls and borrowed lights 

Interior glazing - allow 10% of total 5,464 SF 35.00 191,240 

Interior doors, frames and hardware 

New interior doors per leaf 68 EA 1,800.00 122,400 

7. Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 

871,996 

Expansion 

Floors 

Per program space type 

Offices 1,570 SF 4.00 6,280 

Public spaces 475 SF 35.00 16,625 

Exhibits 1,584 SF 20.00 31,680 

Labs 415 SF 7.50 3,113 

Circulation 715 SF 4.00 2,860 

Page 12





Storage 560 SF 2.50 1,400 

Walls 



Public spaces 1,598 SF 50.00 79,900 

Exhibits 4,826 SF 3.50 16,891 

Labs 1,397 SF 7.50 10,478 

Circulation 2,406 SF 1.50 3,609 

Storage 

Ceilings 


1,904 SF 1.50 2,856 



Exhibits 1,584 SF 15.00 23,760 

Labs 415 SF 15.00 6,225 


Storage 560 SF 1.00 560 

Renovation 

Floors 


Back of house 9,300 SF 2.50 23,250 

Corridors 2,929 SF 4.00 11,716 

Admin 10,062 SF 4.00 40,248 

Wet labs 1,200 SF 7.50 9,000 

Dry labs/work rooms 26,801 SF 4.00 107,204 

Pathway 4,753 SF 2.50 11,883 

Exhibits 7,715 SF 20.00 154,300 

Lobby 2,212 SF 2.50 5,530 

Walls 



Corridors 6,605 SF 1.50 9,908 

Admin 22,692 SF 1.50 34,038 

Wet labs 2,706 SF 6.00 16,237 


Pathway 10,719 SF 3.50 37,517 

Exhibits 17,399 SF 20.00 347,980 

Lobby 4,989 SF 3.50 17,462 

Ceilings 



Corridors 2,929 SF 4.00 11,716 

Page 13





Admin 10,062 SF 4.00 40,248 

Wet labs 1,200 SF 6.00 7,200 


Pathway 4,753 SF 4.00 19,012 

Exhibits 7,715 SF 50.00 385,750 

Lobby 2,212 SF 15.00 33,180 

8. Function Equipment & Specialties 

1,804,158 

Expansion 

Protective guards, barriers and bumpers 

Allow for wall and corner guards 5,319 SF 0.15 798 

Shelving and millwork 

Storage shelving 5,319 SF 1.50 7,979 

Cabinets and countertops 

Allow 5,319 SF 5.00 26,595 

Chalkboards, insignia and graphics, etc. 

Chalkboards and tackboards 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500 

Code and room identifying signage 5,319 SF 0.50 2,660 

Light and vision control 

Projection screens and projector mounting 

brackets 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500 

Amenities and convenience items 

Entrance mats and frames 96 SF 45.00 4,320 

Fire extinguisher cabinets 2 EA 450.00 900 

Renovation 

Protective guards, barriers and bumpers 

Allow for wall and corner guards 65,000 SF 0.15 9,750 

Washroom accessories 

Allow for washroom partitions, toilet and 

bathroom accessories, grab bars and mirrors 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 

Shelving and millwork 

Storage shelving 65,000 SF 0.50 32,500 

High density storage - FF & E 

Cabinets and countertops 

Allow 65,000 SF 5.00 325,000 

Chalkboards, insignia and graphics, etc. 

Chalkboards and tackboards 65,000 SF 0.05 3,250 

Code and room identifying signage 65,000 SF 0.25 16,250 

Page 14





Light and vision control 

Projection screens and projector mounting 

brackets 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 

Amenities and convenience items 

Entrance mats and frames 48 SF 45.00 2,160 

Staff lockers 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 

Fire extinguisher cabinets 19 EA 450.00 8,550 

Wet laboratory casework & equipment 1,200 SF 55.00 66,000 

Dry lab/work room casework & equipment 25,601 SF 15.00 384,015 

Cold rooms - retain existing 

9. Stairs & Vertical Transportation 

928,726 

Expansion 

Steps or short stair flights 

Allow for short stairs and ramps 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 

Elevators 

Three stop service elevator 1 LS 125,000.00 125,000 

Renovation 

Replace existing main circulation stair 1 LS 45,000.00 45,000 

New single flight stair 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 

10. Plumbing Systems 

185,000 

Expansion 

Plumbing by program component 



Exhibits 1,584 SF 15.35 24,306 

Labs 415 SF 12.60 5,229 


Storage 560 SF 7.92 4,435 

Page 15





Renovation 

Plumbing by program component 


Restrooms/shower 600 SF 90.00 54,000 

Corridors 2,929 SF 7.92 23,198 

Admin 10,062 SF 7.92 79,691 

Wet labs 1,200 SF 22.50 27,000 

Dry labs/workrooms 26,801 SF 12.60 337,693 

Pathway 4,753 SF 7.92 37,644 

Exhibits 7,715 SF 14.40 111,096 

Lobby 2,212 SF 12.60 27,871 

11. Heating, Ventilation & Air Conditioning 

824,722 

Expansion 

HVAC by program component 



Exhibits 1,584 SF 85.50 135,432 

Labs 415 SF 81.00 33,615 


Storage 560 SF 7.92 4,435 

Renovation 

HVAC by program component 



Corridors 2,929 SF 45.00 131,805 

Admin 10,062 SF 40.50 407,511 

Wet labs 1,200 SF 85.50 102,600 

Dry labs/workrooms 26,801 SF 81.00 2,170,881 

Pathway 4,753 SF 45.00 213,885 

Exhibits 7,715 SF 85.50 659,633 

Lobby 2,212 SF 72.00 159,264 

4,613,646 

Page 16





12. Electrical Lighting, Power & Communication 

Expansion 

Electrical by program component 



Exhibits 1,584 SF 76.50 121,176 

Labs 415 SF 61.20 25,398 


Storage 560 SF 27.00 15,120 

Renovation 

Electrical by program component 



Corridors 2,929 SF 40.50 118,625 

Admin 10,062 SF 37.80 380,344 

Wet labs 1,200 SF 61.20 73,440 

Dry labs/workrooms 26,801 SF 61.20 1,640,221 

Pathway 4,753 SF 40.50 192,497 

Exhibits 7,715 SF 76.50 590,198 

Lobby 2,212 SF 72.00 159,264 

13. Fire Protection Systems 

3,683,472 

Expansion 

Fire protection by program component 



Exhibits 1,584 SF 3.42 5,417 

Labs 415 SF 2.70 1,121 


Storage 560 SF 2.70 1,512 

Renovation 

Fire protection by program component 



Corridors 2,929 SF 2.70 7,908 

Page 17





Admin 10,062 SF 2.70 27,167 

Wet labs 1,200 SF 3.42 4,104 

Dry labs/workrooms 26,801 SF 3.42 91,659 

Pathway 4,753 SF 2.70 12,833 

Exhibits 7,715 SF 3.42 26,385 

Lobby 2,212 SF 3.60 7,963 

Allow for ethnology space preaction system 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 

243,975 

Page 18


Sitework June 17, 2010 


SITEWORK COMPONENT SUMMARY 

Gross Area: 100,000 SF 

$/SF $x1,000 

14 Site Preparation & Demolition 6.30 630 

15 Site Paving, Structures & Landscaping 6.07 607 

16 Utilities on Site 5.00 500 


Contingency for Development of Design 15.00% 261 

TOTAL BUILDING & SITE (1-16) 1,998 

Subcontractor Bonds 1.00% 20 

MACC Contingency 2.50% 50 

Negotiated Support Services 3.50% 72 

Specified General Conditions 3.00% 64 

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONSTRUCTION COST 2,204 

Preconstruction Services NIC 

GC/CM Fee, Bonds 4.50% 99 

RECOMMENDED BUDGET 2,303 

Escalation to Midpoint (April 2014) 11.83% 272 

\ 

RECOMMENDED BUDGET July 2013 2,575 

Page 19




CSItem Description Quantity Unit Rate Total 

14. Site Preparation & Building Demolition 

Site protective construction 

Erosion control 18,911 SF 0.10 1,891 

Site clearing and grading 

Hardscape/Softscape removal within new 

building footprint 765 SF 2.50 1,913 

Selective demolition and removal 

Interior gut 65,000 SF 7.50 487,500 

Remove existing glazing 7,019 SF 10.00 70,190 

Temporary enclosure of exterior 7,019 SF 2.50 17,548 

Remove existing upper roof 5,400 SF 2.50 13,500 

Cut out and finish perimeter of second floor 

open to below space 1,240 SF 30.00 37,200 

15. Site Paving, Structures & Landscaping 

629,741 

Vehicular paving and curbs 

Loading dock ramp 1,885 SF 10.00 18,850 

Loading dock apron 885 SF 8.00 7,080 

Bus drop off paving 600 SF 5.00 3,000 

Bus drop off curb 85 LF 15.00 1,275 

Pedestrian paving 

Entry plaza paving 3,123 SF 15.00 46,845 

Bike shelter area paving 2,200 SF 5.00 11,000 

Outdoor space paving 2,651 SF 15.00 39,765 

New paved pedestrian paths 1,367 SF 5.00 6,835 

Remove existing paving 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 

Site structures 

Bus shelter 450 SF 100.00 45,000 

Outdoor space shelter with green roof 750 SF 125.00 93,750 

Outdoor stairs 556 SF 25.00 13,900 

Drainage 

Drainage from hardscape 12,711 SF 1.50 19,067 

Page 20




CSItem Description Quantity Unit Rate Total 

Lighting and power specialties 

Lighting to hardscape 12,711 SF 2.50 31,778 

Lighting to softscape 6,200 SF 1.50 9,300 

Landscape planting and maintenance 

Planting - ground covers 6,200 SF 5.00 31,000 

New trees 12 EA 1,200.00 14,400 

Protect existing trees 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 

Irrigation 

Irrigation for new planting 6,200 SF 1.25 7,750 

Fencing and miscellaneous specialties 

Screen walls 704 SF 25.00 17,600 

Screen wall footings 88 SF 75.00 6,600 

Retaining walls 1,580 SF 50.00 79,000 

Retaining wall footings 308 SF 150.00 46,200 

Bollards, railings, benches, trash receptacles, 

etc. 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 

Repair existing paving 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 

Brace exterior totems 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 

16. Utilities on Site 

607,494 

Water mains - domestic and fire 

Allow 1 LS 500,000.00 500,000 

500,000 

Page 21

Burke Museum 

Predesign Life Cycle Cost (Present Worth Method) 

Project Life Cycle (Years) 50 

Discount Rate (%) 2.10% 

PREFERRED OPTION ALTERNATE 2 ALTERNATE 1 

Renovation and Addition New Building on Campus Deferred Renewal 

70,319 70,319 70,319 

Est. PW Est. PW Est. PW 

Initial Cost 52,043,448 52,043,448 70,603,587 70,603,587 0 0 

Construction Cost 

A) Shell 4,223,018 4,223,018 21,340,751 21,340,751 0 

B) Interiors 3,831,000 3,831,000 3,831,000 3,831,000 0 

C) Equipment & Vertical Transportation 1,594,335 1,594,335 1,594,335 1,594,335 0 

D) Mechanical & Electrical 14,893,207 14,893,207 14,893,207 14,893,207 0 

E) Site 2,486,908 2,486,908 3,929,315 3,929,315 0 

TOTAL 27,028,469 27,028,469 45,588,608 45,588,608 0 0 

Other Initial Costs 

A) Other Costs (UW soft costs) 25,014,979 25,014,979 25,014,979 25,014,979 0 

Total Initial Cost Impact (IC) 52,043,448 70,603,587 0 

Initial Cost PW Savings (18,560,140) 52,043,448 

Mark-up 1.4315 1.4315 1.9800 

Replacement / Salvage Costs Year Factor 

A) Clean & seal brick 5 0.9013 170,034 153,252 

Clean & seal brick 10 0.8123 122,934 99,865 122,934 99,865 170,034 138,127 





B) Tuck point 5 0.9013 566,780 510,841 

Tuck point 25 0.5948 409,780 243,729 409,780 243,729 566,780 337,109 

Tuck point 50 0.3538 409,780 144,965 409,780 144,965 566,780 200,506 

C) Reroof - Membrane 5 0.9013 806,622 727,012 

Reroof - Membrane 15 0.7322 583,185 426,992 583,185 426,992 806,622 590,587 



D) Floor finish 7.5 0.8557 608,527 520,699 608,527 520,699 841,674 720,196 

Floor finish 15 0.7322 608,527 445,547 608,527 445,547 841,674 616,251 

Floor finish 22.5 0.6265 608,527 381,242 608,527 381,242 841,674 527,309 

Floor finish 30 0.5361 608,527 326,218 608,527 326,218 841,674 451,203 

Floor finish 37.5 0.4587 608,527 279,135 608,527 279,135 841,674 386,081 

Floor finish 42.5 0.4134 608,527 251,586 608,527 251,586 841,674 347,977 

Floor finish 50 0.3538 608,527 215,275 608,527 215,275 841,674 297,754 

E) Interior paint 10 0.8123 195,510 158,822 195,510 158,822 270,416 219,672 

Interior paint 20 0.6599 195,510 129,019 195,510 129,019 270,416 178,450 




DL 0278-7713 

6/8/2010 

Page 1

Burke Museum 

Predesign Life Cycle Cost (Present Worth Method) 

F) Controls 5 0.9013 487,311 439,215 

Controls 12.5 0.7712 352,324 271,719 352,324 271,719 487,311 375,824 

Controls 25 0.5948 352,324 209,555 352,324 209,555 487,311 289,843 

Controls 37.5 0.4587 352,324 161,613 352,324 161,613 487,311 223,532 

Controls 50 0.3538 352,324 124,639 352,324 124,639 487,311 172,393 

G) AHU 5 0.9013 2,030,004 1,829,651 

AHU 25 0.5948 1,467,685 872,950 1,467,685 872,950 2,030,004 1,207,406 

AHU 50 0.3538 1,467,685 519,213 1,467,685 519,213 2,030,004 718,141 

J) Lighting upgrades 5 0.9013 1,392,316 1,254,900 

Lighting upgrades 12.5 0.7712 1,006,639 776,340 1,006,639 776,340 1,392,316 1,073,782 

Lighting upgrades 25 0.5948 1,006,639 598,729 1,006,639 598,729 1,392,316 828,122 

Lighting upgrades 37.5 0.4587 1,006,639 461,752 1,006,639 461,752 1,392,316 638,664 

Lighting upgrades 50 0.3538 1,006,639 356,112 1,006,639 356,112 1,392,316 492,551 

K) Fire alarm upgrades 5 0.9013 104,424 94,118 

Fire alarm upgrades 12.5 0.7712 75,498 58,226 75,498 58,226 104,424 80,534 

Fire alarm upgrades 25 0.5948 75,498 44,905 75,498 44,905 104,424 62,109 

Fire alarm upgrades 37.5 0.4587 75,498 34,631 75,498 34,631 104,424 47,900 

Fire alarm upgrades 50 0.3538 75,498 26,708 75,498 26,708 104,424 36,941 

L) Seismic upgrade 5 0.9013 0 0 0 0 6,265,423 5,647,051 

M) Elevator upgrade 5 0.9013 0 0 0 0 247,500 223,073 

Elevator upgrade 30 0.5361 178,942 95,927 178,942 95,927 247,500 132,679 

N) ADA upgrade 5 0.9013 0 0 0 0 1,392,316 1,254,900 

O) Other MEP upgrades 10 0.8123 0 0 0 0 696,158 565,523 

P) Other architectural upgrades 5 0.9013 0 0 1,392,316 1,254,900 

Other architectural upgrades 20 0.6599 195,041 128,710 387,629 255,801 1,392,316 918,804 

Q) Landscape upgrades 15 0.7322 0 0 0 0 990,000 724,852 

R) Hazmat abatement 5 0.9013 0 0 0 0 139,232 125,490 

Sub-total 17,468,219 9,409,523 17,660,807 9,536,614 41,963,859 28,560,183 

Other UW Soft Costs 25,014,979 25,014,979 25,014,979 25,014,979 59,438,115 59,438,115 

Total Replacement / Salvage PW Costs 34,424,502 34,551,593 87,998,298 

Operational / Maintenance Cost Escl. 00% PWA 

B) Maintenance & Operations 3.00% 63.0435 400,607 25,255,687 400,607 25,255,687 400,607 25,255,687 

Total Operation / Maintenance (PW) Costs 25,255,687 25,255,687 25,255,687 

Total Present Worth Life Cycle Costs 111,723,636 130,410,867 113,253,985 

Life Cycle (PW) Savings (18,687,230) (1,530,349) 

PW - Present Worth PWA - Present Worth of Annuity 

Assumptions 

1. Replacement cost assumes a building of approximately same program, massing with similar quality levels. 

2. Operation cost is assumed to be $5.697/SF for each option based on calculations provided by UW. 

3. The Deferred Renewal option is based on an allocation of the baseline renovation cost suitably adjusted for piecemeal approach. 

4. The Discount rate of 5.25% was provided by the University of Washington 

DL 0278-7713 

6/8/2010 

Page 2

Since 1979 

The Northwest s Choice 

for Fundraising Counsel 

501 East Pine St reet 

Suit e 301 

Seat t le, WA 98122 

Call: 206.728.1755 

Fax: 206.728.1740 

800.275.6006 

info@collinsgroup.com 

www.collinsgroup.com 

Aggie Sweeney CFRE 

President & CEO 

Kristin Barsness PhD CFRE 

Vice President 

Kate Roosevelt CFRE 

Vice President 

Jim Hopper CFRE 

Principal 

Anne Marie MacPherson 

CFRE 

Principal 

Stuart Grover PhD 

Chairman Emerit us 

PHILANTHROPIC FUNDING FEASIBILITY FOR THE BURKE MUSEUM S CAPITAL PROJECT, 

APRIL 2010 

BACKGROUND 

In October 2009, the Burke Museum (the Burke) retained The Collins Group (TCG) to 

assess the feasibility of raising philanthropic dollars as part of the needed funding for 

a capital project to renovate, transform and expand the museum. The proposed 

project would address the limitations of the current facility and bring the back of 

house forward, allowing researchers and visitors to connect with the collections as 

never before. 

During the six-month study process, TCG evaluated the Burke s readiness against six 

elements key to the success of major fundraising initiatives: organizational strength, 

case for support, leadership, giving potential, internal readiness, and climate and 

timing. 

Through 37 interviews with 44 individuals, and two online surveys with Burke staff 

and Burke Museum Association members, TCG collected community opinions from 

77 constituents regarding the overall vision, community benefit and financial 

feasibility of the proposed project. 

SUMMARY OF GIVING POTENTIAL FINDINGS 

Prioritization of capital project. Study participants were asked about their personal 

support of the Burke Museum s capital project, including how this project would fit 

within their philanthropic priorities over the next several years. Of those who 

answered, about half stated that it would be a high priority for them, about one 

quarter said this project would be a medium priority, and another quarter of 

respondents said it would be a low philanthropic priority. 

Willingness to contribute. The majority of study participants (82 percent) stated 

that they would likely make a philanthropic contribution to this project, but nearly 22 

percent of those who would give were unable to specify an amount. 

Identified giving potential. Combined identified gifts from those study participants 

willing to share their potential gifts totaled between $2.9M to $4.0M. Three lead 

gifts were identified in the range of $500,000 to $1 million. An additional six gifts 

were identified in the range of $100,000 to $250,000. Nearly all the Burke Museum 

Association members who participated in the study shared that they would make a 

gift to the project. While staff members were not asked about giving potential in the 

online survey, several offered that they see themselves as donors for the project. 

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Based on the giving potential identified in the study, as well as our assessment of the 

other five key elements of campaign success, TCG recommends that the Burke take 

additional time for internal planning and campaign advancement, and take steps to 

build toward a private campaign goal of $15 million over the next few years. We 

believe that by undertaking our planning and advancement recommendations, the 

Burke Museum will be able to successfully raise $15M in private support to renovate,

transform, and expand the museum. The following plan outlines the timing and objectives we believe 

are necessary for future campaign success. 

PHASE I: PLANNING, APRIL 2010 

DECEMBER 2011 

This planning phase spans two years, 2010-2011, and encompasses both preparing and finalizing 

planning and branding work for the Burke, as well as providing time for the museum to focus on board 

development. During this phase the Burke will ramp up its internal capacity to support a campaign, as 

well as put in place an extensive planning framework that will assure both BMA and community leaders 

that plans for the new building are feasible, sustainable and the right next step for the museum. 

Building on the impact planning work completed in 2009, additional planning processes needed include 

strategic and operational planning as well as rebranding, and would likely entail working with 

professional consultants outside the Burke s current staff. 

PHASE II: CAMPAIGN ADVANCEMENT, JANUARY 2012 

DECEMBER 2013 

During this phase, the Burke will begin establishing the framework for the campaign, including hiring 

staff, recruiting board and campaign leadership, engaging top donor prospects, developing a campaign 

plan and campaign collateral, and securing early lead gifts. 

PHASE III: THE CAMPAIGN FOR A NEW BURKE, JANUARY 2014 - DECEMBER 2017 

This phase marks the beginning of the formal campaign and spans its life cycle. The campaign will build 

on the preparations completed in the previous three years and focus on securing the fundraising goal, 

transitioning campaign leaders to board positions as appropriate, securing stretch gifts from current 

donors, acquiring new donors and building a broader base of ongoing support for the museum. 

CLOSING 

We have enjoyed our association with the Burke during the past six months. We encourage you to move 

forward with the advancement work necessary for a successful campaign. We look forward to additional 

opportunities to provide service. 

The Collins Group 

April 12, 2010

MEETING NOTES 

Date: September 23, 2009 

Project: Burke Museum (09024) 

Location: Burke Conference Room 

RE: Burke Museum Building Committee Meeting- Sustainability Workshop 

Attending: Julie Stein (Director, Burke Museum, Chair of Burke Museum 

Building Committee), Andrew Whiteman (Senior Curator of Exhibits, 

Designer, Burke Museum), Denis Martynowych (Principal Planner, 

Office of Planning and Budgeting), Diane Quinn (Director of 

Education, Burke Museum), Laura Phillips (Archaeology Collections 

Manager, Burke Museum), Leita Bain (Director of Facilities, 

College of Arts and Sciences), Mary Dunnam (President, Burke 

Museum Association), Dick Olmstead (Associate Director of 

Research, Curator, Botany, Burke Museum), Sarah Tollefson 

(Facilities, Burke Museum Building Committee), Katrina Morgan, 

Katie Oman (Fermata Consulting), Allan Montpellier (WSP Flack + 

Kurtz), John Palewicz, Randy Everett (UW CPO), Clara Simon 

(Sustainability Manager, UW CPO), Tom Kundig, Edward Lalonde, Rick 

Sundberg, Stephen Yamada-Heidner (OSKA) 

Distribution: Attendees, Project file 

The following is a summary of discussion between the above parties: 

1. General Introductions 

a. The meeting attendees introduced themselves, describe their roles on 

the project and initial thoughts on sustainability for the Burke Museum. 

b. Stephen Yamada-Heidner introduced Katrina Morgan and Katie Oman from 

Fermata Consulting. Katrina noted that early discussions on 

sustainability result in greater chances for implementation into the 

final building as well better economy for the project. 

c. Tom Kundig noted that it is important for the Burke, as a natural 

history museum, to consider the sustainability and environmental issues 

as it relates to the objects that they contain and research- animals, 

plants and nature. The Burke has several researchers with scientific 

minds and innovative ideas that can help contribute to the design 

process with ideas of sustainability. Julie noted that California 

Academy of Science (Cal Academy) set the bar for natural history museums 

connectedness to the environment and sustainability. 

d. Clara Simon explained that, in part, her role is to manage the 

University of Washington’s interface with the State regarding 

sustainability and review design documents to assure projects achieve 

LEED Silver. The Burke Museum expansion Request for Qualifications 

(RFQ) stated a sustainability goal of LEED Platinum. 

2. Values of Museum/ Program 

Olson Sundberg Kundig Allen Architects 

159 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 

vox 206.624.5670 fax 206.624.3730 www.oskaarchitects.com

a. The Burke Museum has conducted a year-long internal evaluation of its 

mission, considering sustainability as a key topic. The Burke considers 

itself to have interconnectedness to all life. Within its collections, 

research, exhibits and educational programs, the museum contains a world 

of all life, plants and animals as part of the natural environment. The 

Burke aims to teach something new that will make the world a better 

place. Julie noted that it is important to the Burke to better 

communicate the mission through visibility of sustainable design ideas 

as educational opportunities. 

b. The Burke Museum has existed for over 125 years. Collections contain 

over 12 million objects. 

c. Katrina noted that she has visited the museum and believes that while 

dated, the building appears to be in good physical shape. It was noted 

that the building is not perceived to be in good shape by the 

researchers and staff, especially in terms of preserving collections and 

climatic control. Later, Katrina noted that any building that does not 

meet its programming needs is not sustainable, therefore salvage, re-use 

and recycling opportunities should be considered to limit the 

environmental impacts of construction waste. Katrina noted that she 

believes waste is the shortfall of the imagination. 

d. Julie noted that Burke’s exhibits will not expand significantly, but 

the research focus will grow with the anticipated future expansion 

project. Burke’s current research and collections space is over-loaded, 

has no space to grow and has poor climate control. The Burke is less 

about the conventional museum model which typically focuses on exhibits, 

but is more about research and collections. Laura Phillips noted that 

the public often views the Burke as static, but in fact the collections 

and research happening behind the scenes is not at all static. The 

building should be considered a tool for educating, not a just a 

container for research. 

e. Collections space should be increased in size and quality through 

better climate control, HVAC and mechanical systems. Efficiency for 

better space utilization and space saving should be considered in the 

Burke’s future museum expansion project. 

f. Tom noted that telling the story of what occurs and exists inside the 

building and behind the scenes is important and one of the more 

interesting parts of the project to him. He refers to the building as 

being “inside-out.” 

g. Katrina described Heifer International/ Heifer Village as being known 

for its high level of sustainability and appears this way from the 

building exterior and interior spaces. However, its exhibits appear 

plastic and smell of high VOC materials like vinyl. It would be ideal 

if the Burke could achieve sustainability thoroughly throughout the 

building. 

h. Dick noted that it is important for the Burke to communicate and to 

educate the public of the biodiversity of our region. It is noted that 

while the research space and collections storage may not be the most 

visually and aesthetically interesting spaces, that there are 

educational opportunities in making these more visible through a 

2 

Meeting Notes – September 16, 2009

metaphorical and physical window into the collections. Cal Academy has 

a view window into research areas which is ideal for the public, but 

sometimes uncomfortable for researchers. 

i. Mary Dunnam noted that it is important to show the efficiency of 

potential sustainability decisions for fundraising. Sustainability is 

considered a better business decision. 

j. Clara noted that as part of her sustainability management on the 

project, she will be reporting monthly water usage, VOC content, 

construction waste and be generating an overall waste tally. It is 

suggested that the new Burke building be equipped with metering/ 

monitoring equipment to report and educate visitors on energy usage. 

The Burke and University of Washington will need to determine what level 

of transparency and how much communication they want to allow the 

public. Allan Montpellier sited an example of a current WSP Flack + 

Kurtz project in Tacoma where the water usage is placed on display. 

Providing metrics and quantities of data can be an educational 

opportunity to consider with this new building project. 

k. Tom suggested that the Burke lead LEED by not only acknowledging 

their current criteria and point system, but in looking forward into 

future building technologies and new design ideas. He stated that the 

existing James Chiarelli building represents a line in the sand at 1962. 

The existing building is not as flexible to changing demands, evolution 

of the research and collections programming and of the Burke Museum. 

Like a tree’s growth is influenced by things that happened during its 

lifetime, a building should also grow and evolve with the future. While 

LEED is quantifiable, the Predesign and future museum expansion project 

should aim for larger, bigger picture ideas and visions. 

l. Sarah Tollefson noted that the Burke’s internal Sustainability Action 

Committee suggested the following items for consideration in the 

Predesign work: 

• Necessity for better climate control 

• Building should be an extension of the Burke’s Mission 

• Beyond just signage, the actual physical building and research 

components should communicate sustainability. 

• Bikes and bike storage should be addressed. 

• The Burke should provide people with the opportunity to learn to 

live sustainably. 

• Burke should provide green spaces through green roof systems, 

green skins, landscape, etc. 

• Material choices and vendors should align with Burke’s Mission. 

For example, some of the tribes that work with the Museum also 

harvest sustainable wood products. 

m. Katrina noted that to tear down the existing building and start over 

doesn’t seem in keeping with the mission of the Burke. Instead, she 

suggests that the design team communicate the story of the existing 

building as a snapshot in time by recording the performance of the 

existing building to later compare to the performance of the new 

building. Katrina referenced the 20-minute video “ The Story of 

Stuff ”. The video illustrates the original of materials we use every 

3 


day, the manufacturing cycle and the impacts of their extraction and 

disposal. 

n. Julie noted that the Burke must communicate the value of the museum 

to the University of Washington. It would be ideal if the new building 

project helped to highlight the value and educational opportunity that 

the museum provides through sustainable elements. Julie noted that the 

Burke has a great deal of research happening within the museum that is 

connected to a variety of individual departments within the University. 

o. It would be ideal to use the Burke project as an educational tool and 

model for future projects, allowing other departments, such as 

Architecture, Engineering, Bioscience, etc. to learn by this example. 

The Burke should be considered a learning lab. 

p. Tom described the North Cascade Institute as being an example of a 

building that educates. Its location on the dam allows visitors to 

experience the setting and subtly understand the impact of their energy 

use through the direct relationship with the site, surroundings and 

environment. 

q. Opportunities for subtle sustainability communication and education 

would be ideal. Katrina suggested that the new building project have a 

theoretical goal of “no signage required ” allowing the building to 

communicate sustainable design on its own. For example, instead of 

posting a sign that explains that rainwater is harvested in the building 

and stored in a tank below grade, the tank could be integrated in a 

visible location for visitors to understand. Randy Everett noted that 

some signage will be required. 

r. Katrina referred to Seattle Central Community College featuring a 

loading dock area to communicate the buildings’ compost, recycling and 

waste management efforts to educate visitors and the public on back-ofhouse 

processes that one typically wouldn’t see expressed in a building. 

s. It would be ideal for the Burke to communicate the layering of its 

invisible insides into building components. It is noted that the 

deepest part of the university is research and that the Burke should 

find a way to celebrate that externally. 

t. It is noted that with the Burke, the people are more flexible than 

the collections. Denis Martynowych described a system of zoning the 

building so that different program elements are arranged according to 

their climatic needs. For example, at the Molecular Building, the 

offices are naturally ventilated, while the collections are more 

carefully climatically controlled. 

u. It would be ideal if the new Burke building project would lessen the 

load on the University’s steam plant which is natural gas operated. The 

University’s Climate Action Plan proposes lessening the needs of the 

steam plant in the near future and exploring hydroelectric and 

geothermal power as alternative sources of energy. 

v. Katrina describes providing the right strategy for the right place. 

Not all projects need to choose between providing all air conditioned or 

all naturally ventilated. In some cases, a hybrid of the two systems 

might be more appropriate. 

4 


w. Allan noted that they often compartmentalize mechanical systems and 

build in flexibility for future adjustments when technology and building 

program needs change. 

3. Summarizing Key Points 

a. Katrina summarized the points discussed to identify key statements 

and project’s sustainability goals: 

• The design can look back and look forward simultaneously 

• Strive for evolved building design (right strategy/ right place) 

• Express sustainable design clearly and intuitively (no signage 

required to understand) 

• The building itself can celebrate research by creating a teaching 

lab 

b. It would be ideal to create a new building which could meet the needs 

of 100 years from now. Julie described as an example of how a library 

has several books on the subject of the civil war. Whereas it would be 

more efficient to just have one book, several books provide a variety of 

perspectives. 

c. Katrina described the 80/20 rule as it relates to sustainability. 

80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. In sustainability, it 

is important to concentrate on the 20% of the strategies that will 

result in 80% more effectiveness. Similarly, Katrina described that 

often sustainable design teams conduct a goose chase by over extending 

their efforts wasting time on small things that do not result in 

significant impact. Instead, she encourages the design team to focus 

energy on items with substantial environment/ economic returns. 

d. Clara noted that University of Washington has several resources and 

years of experience trying various sustainable design techniques on 

other CPO projects. The Predesign team should confirm and verify with 

Clara before pursuing ideas to make sure that they will work for the 

University. 

e. The Daylighting Lab is available for free to this project. Clara 

noted that the Daylighting Lab typically uses students to bring fresh 

ideas to the research process. 

f. Tom noted that architects are often behind on sustainable design 

technology and not keen on the understanding of a more holistic approach 

to environmentalism. It is important that this be an authentic building 

as it will be seriously scrutinized. We can learn from the very brief 

history of building design and technologies and move beyond common 

misconceptions and mistakes. Tom described the misconceptions of using 

east and west oriented horizontally projected sun shades in the Pacific 

Northwest to control sunlight. Katrina pointed out that this is an 

example of an ineffective strategy that unnecessarily adds costs to 

projects. 

4. Sustainability Budgeting & Costs 

5 


a. It is noted that the State has already funded $300,000 to the project 

to conduct the Predesign work. It is believed that the State will fund 

no more than 2/3 of the $50 million building project. Private funding 

through fundraising and donors will flow through the University of 

Washington process. The building is owned by University of Washington. 

b. Katrina suggested that sustainable design should contribute to 

successful fundraising efforts for the Burke. For example, sustainable 

design is attractive to many donors, alternative funding can be 

available to offset the costs of some strategies and projects that 

educate large numbers of people are especially well-aligned to procure 

environmental grants. She suggested that the Burke consider alternate 

funding resources such as utility rebates, corporate grants, state, 

local and national funding programs, American Recovery and Reinvestment 

funds, subsides, technology and industry- specific funding sources. 

Some organizations require stringent LEED criteria significantly reduced 

energy consumption in order to be eligible for funding. The Burke 

Museum project is especially well-aligned to be competitive for the 

alternate funding sources because of the educational components, the 

public nature of the facility, the cutting edge nature of the 

sustainable design and its timing in design and construction. To 

support the fundraising process, it is important for the team to fully 

tell the story of the Burke, including sustainable design decisions. 

c. Tom noted that “what happens in the cosmos is so much more 

interesting to me than Twitter. ” Museum content has a degree of 

performance that electronic content does not. It was discussed that a 

building that can impress a 12-year old through sustainability 

components is successful. Julie noted that changes in cultures and 

natural history go through long periods of evolution punctuated by major 

events and periods of significant change. The world is doing what it 

always has done. The juxtaposition between natural evolution and modern 

fast-paced technology is an interesting dynamic to explore through the 

architecture of the Burke. 

d. Denis referenced the book “How Buildings Learn ” to examine what we 

intend by flexibility in the context of the Burke and how it can be 

successfully executed here. Julie noted that one often imagines walls 

when we discuss flexibility, but acoustical considerations are very 

important and need to be addressed early on in the design process. At 

Cal Academy acoustical design is poorly resolved. It was noted that the 

Burke Room has poor acoustics which should be addressed in the new 

design. 

e. Randy noted that the Seattle Department of Planning and Development 

(DPD) may provide expedited review of permitting for projects that are 

LEED platinum through their Priority Green program. 

f. Seattle and University of Washington have high sustainability 

standards and it is believed that the community will support 

environmental efforts. 

g. Allan noted that beyond LEED, we should consider the 2030 Challenge 

which aims to achieve carbon neutrality by the year 2030. He noted that 

the Challenge reinforces conservation first. Tenants and Owners are 

typically the biggest driver of energy consumption which can be 

6 


challenging to work around. It is noted that the Burke is on board to 

setting high performance standards. 

h. Clara noted that University of Washington is following the states 

participation in Net Zero Energy Building which aims at zero net energy 

consumption and zero carbon emissions for government buildings by 2050. 

It is noted that federal money, research support and grants are 

available as incentives for buildings to participate in these programs. 

Denis noted that the University of Washington also has internal funding 

opportunities that they can help open the door to for the project. 

i. Katrina noted that LEED Silver/ Gold is relatively easy in a new 

building project through efficient conventional design measures. 

However, Platinum certification requires more integration of deeper 

green systems and techniques. 

j. Katrina noted that early cost estimates for achieving LEED Platinum 

on the project are justifiably based on available cost data for existing 

Platinum buildings. The project with this is that existing Platinum 

buildings are the first built of their kind, so their costs do not 

reflect important lessons learned through these buildings. Full 

integration of sustainable design techniques, early goal-setting, 

reduction of un-necessary added costs (i.e. horizontal sunshades on east 

or west facades), and maximized incentives all contribute to reduction 

in added cost to achieve LEED Platinum. Furthermore, LEED Platinum 

buildings should achieve significantly higher energy performance 

reducing the operating costs. 

k. Clara noted that Clark Hall at University of Washington aimed for 

LEED Silver, but is now 2 points away from Platinum. Katrina warned the 

design team against aiming for a LEED threshold that is too low (i.e. 

Gold) on the Burke project because there is a high likelihood of 

achieving Platinum due to early goal-setting and sophisticated design 

team. To prevent future added cost or design changes, she suggests that 

the project set LEED Platinum as a goal during Predesign. 

l. Tom noted that as a board member, there is value in reducing building 

operation costs so that they can put money back into the programs. Dick 

asked whether one can translate higher costs for construction to longterm 

operational cost reductions. 

m. It is determined that the Burke Predesign and future expansion 

project will set LEED Platinum as a goal. Although we may not achieve 

Platinum, we definitely won’t if it is not the intended target. It is 

noted that the project may be scrutinized if it does not aim towards 

LEED Platinum. 

n. Katrina suggested that we not only compare the Burke’s future 

expansion project to ASHRAE standards, but also evaluate its performance 

in comparison to how the current building operates. It may be 

educational to show comparisons. It is noted that energy consumption 

data is not available for all buildings on the University of Washington 

campus since they are not individually metered, but powered by a central 

source. Clara and Sarah believe that they can obtain temporary meters 

to monitor energy and water consumption and air quality starting now so 

that the trending data will be available by the time the new building is 

built. 

7 


The preceding is assumed to be a complete and accurate record of the 

significant items and actions agreed upon at the above meeting(s). Please 

advise the author immediately of any additions or corrections. Work is 

proceeding on the basis of this record. 

Prepared by: 

Edward Lalonde 

Olson Sundberg Kundig Allen Architects 

8 


Project Name: 

Project Address: 

LEED for New Construction v 2.2 

Registered Project Checklist 

Yes ? No 

Yes ? No 

Yes Prereq 1 

Credit 1 

Credit 2 

Credit 3 

Credit 4.1 

Credit 4.2 

Credit 4.3 

Credit 4.4 

Credit 5.1 

Credit 5.2 

Credit 6.1 

Credit 6.2 

Credit 7.1 

Credit 7.2 

Credit 8 

Yes ? No 

Project Totals (Pre-Certification Estimates) 69 Points 

Certified: 26-32 points Silver: 33-38 points Gold: 39-51 points Platinum: 52-69 points 

Sustainable Sites 14 Points 

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention 

Site Selection 

Development Density & Community Connectivity 

Brownfield Redevelopment 

Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation 

Alternative Transportation, Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms 

Required 

Alternative Transportation, Low-Emitting & Fuel Efficient Vehicles 1 

Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacity 

Site Development, Protect or Restore Habitat 

Site Development, Maximize Open Space 

Stormwater Design, Quantity Control 

Stormwater Design, Quality Control 

Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof 

Heat Island Effect, Roof 

Light Pollution Reduction 

Water Efficiency 5 Points 

Credit 1.1 Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50% 

1 

Credit 1.2 Water Efficient Landscaping, No Potable Use or No Irrigation 

1 

Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies 

1 

Credit 3.1 Water Use Reduction, 20% Reduction 

1 

Credit 3.2 Water Use Reduction, 30% Reduction 

1 

Last Modified: May 2008 1 of 4 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1



Yes ? No 

Energy & Atmosphere 17 Points 

Yes Prereq 1 Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems 

Required 

Yes Prereq 1 Minimum Energy Performance 

Required 

Yes Prereq 1 Fundamental Refrigerant Management 

Required 

*Note for EAc1: All LEED for New Construction projects registered after June 26, 2007 are required to achieve at least two (2) points. 

Credit 1 

Credit 2 

Optimize Energy Performance 

Credit 1.1 

Credit 1.2 

Credit 1.3 

Credit 1.4 

Credit 1.5 

Credit 1.6 

Credit 1.7 

Credit 1.8 

Credit 1.9 

Credit 1.10 

10.5% New Buildings / 3.5% Existing Building Renovations 

14% New Buildings / 7% Existing Building Renovations 









On-Site Renewable Energy 

Credit 2.1 

Credit 2.2 

Credit 2.3 

1 to 10 

1 to 3 

2.5% Renewable Energy 

1 

7.5% Renewable Energy 

2 

12.5% Renewable Energy 3 

Credit 3 Enhanced Commissioning 

1 

Credit 4 Enhanced Refrigerant Management 

1 

Credit 5 Measurement & Verification 

1 

Credit 6 Green Power 1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

Last Modified: May 2008 2 of 4



Yes ? No 

Yes Prereq 1 

Credit 1.1 

Credit 1.2 

Credit 1.3 

Credit 2.1 

Credit 2.2 

Credit 3.1 

Credit 3.2 

Credit 4.1 

Credit 4.2 

Credit 5.1 

Credit 5.2 

Credit 6 

Credit 7 

Yes ? No 

Yes Prereq 1 

Materials & Resources 13 Points 

Storage & Collection of Recyclables 

Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 

Building Reuse, Maintain 95% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 

Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 

Construction Waste Management, Divert 50% from Disposal 

Construction Waste Management, Divert 75% from Disposal 

Required 

Materials Reuse, 5% 1 

Materials Reuse, 10% 

Recycled Content, 10% (post-consumer + 1/2 pre-consumer) 

Recycled Content, 20% (post-consumer + 1/2 pre-consumer) 

Regional Materials, 10% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured 

Regional Materials, 20% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured 

Rapidly Renewable Materials 

Certified Wood 

Indoor Environmental Quality 15 Points 

Credit 1 

Credit 2 

Credit 3.1 

Credit 3.2 

Credit 4.1 

Credit 4.2 

Credit 4.3 

Credit 4.4 

Credit 5 

Credit 6.1 

Credit 6.2 

Credit 7.1 

Credit 7.2 

Credit 8.1 

Minimum IAQ Performance 

Low-Emitting Materials, Paints & Coatings 1 

Last Modified: May 2008 3 of 4 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Required 

Yes Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control 

Required 

Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring 

Increased Ventilation 

Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction 

Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy 

Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives & Sealants 

Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems 

Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood & Agrifiber Products 

Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control 

Controllability of Systems, Lighting 

Controllability of Systems, Thermal Comfort 

Thermal Comfort, Design 

Thermal Comfort, Verification 

Daylight & Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces 

Credit 8.2 Daylight & Views, Views for 90% of Spaces 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1



Yes ? No 

Innovation & Design Process 5 Points 

Credit 1.1 Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title 

1 


1 


1 


1 

Credit 2 LEED® Accredited Professional 

1 

Last Modified: May 2008 4 of 4

Figure 3.1 Environmental Design Considerations Form 

Environmental Design Consideration 

Version 1.0 July 2005 

Project Title: Burke Museum Renovation Date: 

23-Jun-10 

Owner: University of Washington Owner's Rep: 

Clara Simon 

Owner's Project No: Owner's Phone No: 

206 543-2258 

Owner's E-mail: simonch@u.washington.edu Owner's Fax No: 

Completed by: Stephen Yamada-Heidner Phone No: 

206-624-5670 

Firm: Olson Kundig Architects E-mail: 

stephen@olsonkundigarchitects.com 

Bldg Type: 

Museum 

Approx. sq. ft: 70,319 New Remodel Addition 

The following are elements of an energy efficient design and can contribute to LEED TM 

points. Check 'Yes' to indicate items that will be considered in the High Performance 

Alternative of the Energy Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

Site Considerations Yes No N/A 

1) Building orientated to optimize energy efficiency 

2) Landscaping to provide solar shading 

Envelope 

3) Energy StarTM compliant roof 

4) Roof insulation to meet or exceed R-30 rigid or R-38 batt* 

5) Wall insulation with 

a) wood studs, R-19 batt insulation* 

b) metal studs, R-19 and rigid insulation on the exterior* 

c) mass wall, R-10 rigid insulation* 

6) Windows: 

a) U=0.45 or lower* 

b) SHGC SHGC=0.45 0 45 ( (reduced d d cooling li lload) d) or l lower* * 

c) Exceed 50% Visual Light Transmittance (increased 

daylighting)* 

7) Skylights U=0.60 or lower* 

8) Doors U=0.50 or lower* 

Lighting 

9) Incorporate daylighting in over 50% of occupied critical 

visual task areas 

10) Automated daylight harvesting controls 

11) Lumen maintenance controls (metal halide with electronic balast) 

12) Fluorescent lighting for the gym, multipurpose, commons or other 

High Bay application 

13) Lighting power densities will meet or be lower than the following* 

a) Classroom: 1.2 watts per square foot (w/sf) 

b) Gym: 1.00 w/sf (1.8 w/sf over competitive area) 

c) Office: 1.00 w/sf 

d) Library: 1.30 w/sf 

e) Corridor: 0.70 w/sf 

* Represents ELCCA prescriptive elements 

Renewable Energy Yes No N/A 

14) Incorporate solar photovoltaic (PV) technology: 

a) for general building power 

b) for isolated loads in remote locations (e.g. crosswalks) 

15) Solar water heater

16) Wind power 

17) Heat recovery systems 

18) Geothermal 

Water Conservation 

19) Waterless Urinals 

20) Rain water/gray water collection systems 

21) Water efficient landscaping 

22) Water efficient fixtures 

23) Automated lavatory faucets 

HVAC & Electrical 

24) Natural ventilation in lieu of mechanical cooling or partly so 

25) Displacement ventilation 

26) Thermal Storage 

27) Premium efficiency motors 

28) Independent Building Commissioning Agent hired by owner 

29) Variable flow fans and pumping systems 

30) Heat recovery systems (between supply and exhaust) 

31) Evaporative cooling to augment or replace mechanical cooling 

32) High efficiency boilers 

33) High efficiency chillers 

Controls 

34) Building automation system 

35) Carbon Dioxide monitoring (gym/multipurpose/commons, etc.) 

36) Demand control ventilation 

Uninterruptible Power 

37) Fuel cells for uninterruptible power systems 

List other energy efficient items or strategies that will be considered:

Skirball Cultural Center - Office of Planning & Budgeting (OPB ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?