Strategic Facility Planning Report (PDFDrive)

S T R AT E G I C FA C I L I T Y P L A N N I N G R E P O R T
Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians
VOLUME III: CLINICAL SCIENCES CAMPUS PLAN

SUPPLIMENTAL STUDIES : SCENARIO 7, 8 + 9
© October 2005 | HGA commission no. 2042-009-04
Report Prepared by
Hines | 5000 Wells Fargo Center Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 344-1200
HGA | 701 Washington Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 758-4564
LarsonAllen | 220 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 376-4723
Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME III: SUPPLIMENTAL STUDIES:

SCENARIOS 7, 8 AND 9
01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 03 SCENARIO 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Assumptions and Descriptions A. Scenario Description and Program Assumptions
Program Summary B. Children’s Hospital Macro Program (Exhibit 8A)

Staging Summary (Stage 1 & 2) (Exhibit 8B)
Phase I Site Plan
C. Ambulatory Care Clinic Interim Report
Scenario 7 (Exhibit 8C) (See Scenario 7–Same As)
Scenario 8
D. Stacking Plans
Scenario 9 Proposed
Staging Plan: Cost and Schedule Summary E. Site Plans
Conclusion & Recommendation Phase I
F. ACC Clinic Site Options
(See Scenario 7-Same As)
02 SCENARIO 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 G. Floor Plate Options
A.Scenario Description and Program Assumptions H. Cost Model
B. Children’s Hospital Macro Program (Exhibit 7A) (Stage 1 & 2)
Staging Summary (Stage 1 & 2) (Exhibit 7B)
I. Schedule
C. Ambulatory Care Clinic Interim Report (Exhibit 7C)
D. Stacking Plans 04 SCENARIO 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Existing A. Scenario Description and Program Assumptions
Proposed ( Phase 1 & future) B. Children’s Hospital Macro Program (Exhibit 9A)
E. Site Plans Staging Summary (Stage 1 & 2) (Exhibit 9B)
Phase I C. Ambulatory Care Clinic Interim Report
F ACC Clinic Site Options (Schemes 1-4) (Exhibit 9C) (See Scenario 7–Same As)
G. Children’s Hospital Floor Plate Options D. Stacking Plans
H. Nursing Unit and Patient Room Studies Proposed
I. Massing and Sun Angle Studies E. Site Plans

Phase I
J. Cost Model
(Stage 1 & 2) F. Floor Plate Options
G. Cost Model
K. Schedule
(Stage 1 & 2)
H. Schedule
01 Executive Summary
01 executive summary
Background
In August 2004, the University of Minnesota and its Academic Health Cen-
ter, (AHC) Fairview Health Services through its Fairview-University Medical
Center (F-UMC), and the University of Minnesota Physicians (UMP) pub-
lished Volume I of the Clinical Sciences Campus Plan. In this plan, the part-
nership began looking at joint needs and initiated the process of reconciling,
integrating and synthesizing a strategic plan for future clinical facilities at the
University of Minnesota. The primary objective of this process has been to
revitalize the clinical sciences and to identify required capital and implemen-
tation issues. Through this joint planning process, the partners established a
common vision, goals and objectives, master planning principles, as well as a
more comprehensive understanding of each organization’s needs, challenges
and internal planning processes.
With this framework in mind, Volume I of the Clinical Sciences Campus

Plan explored four different scenarios for meeting several core objectives of
the clinical sciences plan –
1.) Replace and consolidate Children’s hospital facilities
2.) Enhance and consolidate the University’s clinical sciences with a new
Ambulatory Care Center that improves patient access and services.
3.) Consolidate clinical laboratories
4.) Consolidate all Fairview-University Medical Center clinical

operations on a “single site” on the University campus within 20 years
while maintaining a viable Riverside clinical campus in the interim.
5.) Create consolidated facilities for the School of Public Health
6.) Create the physical opportunity for the AHC to proceed toward
the objectives of the AHC 2000 District Plan, including expanded
research facilities (including the Lillihei Heart Institute/Cancer
Center, improved educational facilities, effective re-use of vacated
space within the Phillips Wangensteen Building (PWB), and
expanded green space.
7.) Synchronize Clinical Sciences Campus planning priorities with

University-wide planning needs to consider residence halls and
student housing, transportation and parking and stadium planning.
In these four scenarios use of multiple sites near existing clinical facilities on
the University of Minnesota campus were explored. These scenarios consid-
ered the needs of each partner and attempted to balance each organization’s

priority needs into an integrated solution. After months of study, the follow-
ing conclusion was drafted:
1. The phasing scenario which best meets the operational and capital
efficiency planning principles for enhanced children’s hospital
facilities, and an eventual single site for Fairview-University Medical
Center involved the relocation of at least one of the University
dormitories, most likely Pioneer Hall.
2. While this scenario best meets the planning principles it would only
be pursued IF all the following conditions are met:
a. The University’s current planning effort for student housing results in
a feasible plan to relocate a dormitory, most likely Pioneer Hall in the
short term, and potentially a second residence hall in the long term.
b. A feasible plan for financing, and phasing if necessary, of this scenario
is developed with the requisite financial commitments by appropriate
parties. Similarly, the requisite financial commitments for the other
project components will need to be made by other partners of the
clinical campus plan initiative.
By December, 2004, the Clinical Campus Steering Committee had deter-

mined that it could not meet these two conditions. The work groups were
then re-directed to explore other options for siting, specifically, the Children’s
Hospital facilities and the outpatient clinic facilities. Other major objectives
were set aside until these primary program elements could be sited and a
financing plan developed to ensure implementation. Volumes II (Scenarios 5
& 6) and III (Scenarios 7 – 9) of the Clinical Sciences Campus Plan explore
these additional options.

Assumptions & Descriptions
Introduction
Recognizing that the Masonic-VFW site for a consolidated Children’s facil-
ity and a remodeled PWB for the Ambulatory Care Clinic yielded less than
optimal solutions that could truly revitalize clinical sciences at the University,
the Clinical Campus Steering Committee extended its search for better facil-
ity sites for its major programs. In June, 2005 the siting work group began
looking at three variations of previous planning options.
• Scenario 7 – Masonic/VFW site for the Children’s facilities; Block 12
(Dinnaken) site for the Ambulatory Care Clinic
• Scenario 8 – Riverside site for the Children’s facilities; Dinnaken site
for the Ambulatory Care Clinic
• Scenario 9 – both Children’s and ACC at or adjacent to the
Dinnaken site
While the ACC remains on the Dinnaken site in all three scenarios, it’s rela-
tionship to the Children’s facility and Unit J, as well as the relationship of the
Children’s facilities itself to Unit J, provided an important planning consider-
ation for shared services, diagnostic and ancillary services.
Assumptions and descriptions

Based on the updated programmatic requirements of the consolidated
children’s facility and the ACC, some modifications to earlier assumptions
were developed.
In the case of the consolidated Children’s facility, the updated programmatic
assumptions, funding capacities and schedule of facility delivery serve to rein-
force the critical need for adjacencies between the new Children’s facility and
existing Fairview-University Medical Center facilities, either on the Univer-
sity of Minnesota East Bank Campus near Unit J, or on the Fairview-Univer-
sity Medical Center’s Riverside Campus near the Riverside East facility. The
ability to share non-critical ancillary services with existing F-UMC facilities
will reduce redundancy, conserve financial resources, and accelerate facility
delivery while enhancing patient care and service delivery.
Outpatient clinic adjacencies relative to inpatient services, while highly desir-

able for staff and faculty efficiency do not appear to achieve sufficient capital
and operational benefits to overcome the cost, complexity and schedule im-
pacts of co-locating the inpatient and outpatient services on either campus.
An outpatient clinic location on the edge of the Academic Health Center
district provides excellent patient ingress/egress and wayfinding to and from
outpatient services, enhances the efficiency and quality of patient care de-
livery, provides parking availability, and significant opportunity to establish
clinical branding and identity yet still within and integral to the context of
the University of Minnesota Clinical Sciences Campus. It significantly re-
duces congestion and wayfinding conflicts between clinic patients/visitors
and the University’s undergraduate student community. Impacts to existing
clinical operations and ongoing University programs will be reduced due to
a less congested site, minimizing of the need for temporary program swing
space, and easier access for construction deliveries and activities.

Each of the three scenarios honors the development opportunities that have
been identified in previous planning for the re-generation of the Academic
Health Center. Each makes the replacement of Southeast Mayo, Southwest/
Northwest Mayo, Children’s Rehab, Variety Club, Boynton Health Services,
Masonic/VFW as well as the renovation of the Phillips-Wangensteen Build-
ing and Moos Tower possible by freeing-up a modest amount of swing space
to support a phased replacement strategy.
Scenario 7
• The outpatient Ambulatory Care Clinic is located on a full block site known
as Block 12 (also known as the Dinnaken site). This site is on the East Bank
Campus perimeter and is bounded by Fulton Street, Ontario Street, Essex
Street and Erie Street. The property has been acquired by the University,
is clear of existing improvements and provides no impediment to project
commencement.
• Parking for the clinic is contemplated in several subterranean levels under
the clinic building. This will free up capacity in the existing Fairview
PV parking structure to handle parking needs for the expansion of the
Children’s facility.
• Future growth capacity for the clinic is available on the site specified above
with little or no constriction.
• The consolidated Children’s facility is located on the current site of the
Masonic/VFW facilities. This site is bounded by Diehl Hall and PWB to the
west, Delaware Street to the north, Harvard Street on the east and provides
adjacency and connection to F-UMC’s existing Unit J Hospital facility to
the south.
• Due to size and geometry of the site, some limitations on the Children’s
facility floor plate configuration and subsequent departmental layout and
interconnections will exist.
• The Children’s facility site requires the relocation of the programs currently
residing in the Masonic/VFW facility. The University of Minnesota has
acquired the Minnesota Department of Health Building located at 717
Delaware Street which will become vacant in January 2006 when MDH
relocates to its new facilities in Saint Paul. In this Scenario the MDH
building could serve as the location for displaced Masonic/VFW programs.
• Future growth capacity for the Children’s program could be vertical, on
top of the new facility, vertical on top of Unit J, or horizontal on the site of
Diehl Hall pending its program relocation.
• The remainder of Fairview Riverside programs would be located on the
Pioneer Hall site, adjacent to the existing hospital and new Children’s facility
at some point in the future as the student housing program regenerates in a
new location.
• Relocation of the clinic to a new facility provides an opportunity within
PWB clinic release space to stage programs for future replacement of
obsolete AHC facilities or to consolidate currently fragmented AHC
programs.

Scenario 8
This scenario differs from Scenario 7 only in that the children’s facilities are
located on the Riverside campus. Other assumptions -
• The consolidated Children’s facility is located on the F-UMC’s Riverside
Campus, on a site currently occupied by the Green Lot surface parking
facility. This site is bounded by Riverside Avenue on the south, the
Riverside East building on the north, the Red Ramp parking facility on the
west, and the Riverside Park Plaza building on the east.
• This location provides adjacency and interconnection with ancillary services
available in the existing Riverside East Hospital.
• Size and geometry of the site will provide significant flexibility for floor plate
configuration and subsequent departmental layout and interconnection.
• Parking for the consolidated Children’s program will be served by new
subterranean parking facilities under the new Children’s facility. Displaced
surface parking from the Green Lot could be shifted to vacant capacity in
the Fairview PV facility.
• No existing program relocation to swing space is needed in this scenario
as the ACC and Children’s sites are not occupied by buildings or existing
programs.
• Future growth capacity for the Children’s program could be vertical, on top
of the new facility, and/or horizontal to the west as the Red Ramp parking
facility becomes obsolete.
• Future consolidation of F-UMC’s adult programs could be accomplished on
the East Bank Campus adjacent to Unit J, or on the Riverside Campus as
aging Riverside facilities are regenerated.
PWB release space to stage programs for future replacement of obsolete
AHC facilities and/or consolidate fragmented AHC programs.
• The outpatient Ambulatory Care Clinic is located on a full block site
known as Block 12, also known as the Dinnaken site. This site is on the
East Bank Campus perimeter and is bounded by Fulton, Ontario, Essex
and Erie Streets. The property has been acquired by the University, is clear
of buildings and associated improvements and provides no impediments to
project commencement.
the clinic building. This will free up capacity in the existing Fairview PV
parking structure for use by F-UMC staff displaced by development of the
Green Lot site.
Scenario 9
This scenario sites both the Children’s Hospital facilities and the ACC at or
immediately adjacent to the Dinnaken site.
• The consolidated Children’s facility is located on Block 11 adjacent to the
ACC site on Dinnaken. The site is bounded by Oak, Essex, Ontario and
Fulton Streets.
• This site will need to be acquired from the private owners currently in
possession of multiple parcels.

• Future growth for capacity for the Children’s program is available on the site
specified, both vertically and horizontally, with little or no constriction.
• The remainder of F-UMC Riverside programs could be located on adjacent
parcels to the east of the clinic, subject to acquisition from the private land
owners, or toward Unit J on dormitory sites at some point in the future as
the student housing programs regenerate in a new location.
PWB backfill space to stage programs for future replacement of obsolete
AHC facilities and/or consolidate fragmented AHC programs.
• Consolidation and relocation of the Children’s program provides an
opportunity to decongest Unit J towards an 80/20 private room model, or
to shift adult programs from the Riverside Campus out of aging facilities.
• The outpatient Ambulatory Care Clinic is located on a full block site known
as Block 12, also known as the Dinnaken site. This site in on the East Bank
Campus perimeter and is bounded by Fulton Street, Ontario Street, Essex
Street and Erie Street. The property has been acquired by the University, is
clear of buildings and associated improvements and has no restrictions to
project commencement.
the clinic building. This will free up capacity in the existing Fairview PV
parking structure which may allow F-UMC to shift is parking needs for
the Oak Street Ramp to the Fairview PV Ramp and release some portion
of its leased spaces in the Oak Street Ramp, or utilize this capacity for the
Children’s facility.

Program Summary
PROGRAM SUMMARY
Program Relocation Descriptions and Sequences
SCENARIO 7 General Description:

Scenario 7 considers the Phase I revitalization of the Clinical Sciences Cam-
pus by implementing the following elements:
• Development of a new Ambulatory Care Clinic on the Dinnaken Block
(Block 12) with associated clinic parking.
• Development of a replacement Children’s Hospital on the current site of the
Masonic/VFW Hospital, with linkages to PWB and Unit J.
• Acquisition and adaptive reuse of the current Minnesota Department of
Health Building (MDH) when the Department of Health vacates to its new
facility
• Relocation of the existing VFW/Masonic program to the MDH building

Scenario 8 considers the revitalization of the Clinical Sciences Campus by
implementing the following elements:
• Development of a replacement Children’s Hospital, on a staged schedule, on
the Riverside Campus. (See Attached Staging Plan).
• Consolidation of the Adult’s, Women’s and Children’s hospital programs on
the Riverside Campus, based on a staged implementation.
• No program swing space is needed in this study.

Scenario 9 considers the Phase I revitalization of the Clinical Sciences Cam-
pus by implementing the following elements:
• Development of a replacement Children’s Hospital on the adjacent block to
the ACC Clinic west of Dinnaken.
• Acquisition of Block 11 adjacent to Dinnaken Block is necessary
• No program swing space is needed in this study

Phase I Site Plan – Scenario 7
University of Minnesota
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
S tadium C ons truc tion
6/2006 - 6/2008
integrated
waste mgmt
facility Phase I
September 2005
Existing AHC Facilities

(Patient Care/Research/Education/Parking)
Campus Open Space

P arking
washington ave radisson hotel M.D.H.
parking ramp
B uilding
transportation
& safety bldg
L R T C ons truc tion / L ine 2007 Vehicular Traffic

weaver
P ed's Only
V ehic ular
jackson
P ed's &
hall densford
hall Ambulance Traffic
Minor
molecular & moos
health E xis ting
basic
sciences
cellular
biology science
tower
P arking
(804 s talls )
Shuttle Route
&
biomed P ublic /
engin. P atient
P WB
P arking Drop-Off Area
R emodel S taff
boynton health 10/2006-?
service mayo memorial building P arking
territorial hall R eloc ated Automated Kiosk/Wayfinding
existing oak street
underground ramp
parking
child diehl hall One Way T raffic
rehab
varie
ty clu cardio Unit J
b re res cntr
sear
ch c
ntr
& cancer
cntr C linic C linic
frontier hall E xpans ion C linic E xpans ion
pioneer hall A rea A rea P arking
103,700 gs f footprint
- 530 stalls-3 Levels (below)
- 400 stalls-4 levels (above)
C urrent east river road parcel
930 stall (total)
S ervic e A c c es s
T raffic F rom I-94

A mbulanc e E as t & Wes t
V ertic al expans ion on E ntranc e
top of P has e I,
Overall Site Analysis

maximize height
F airview R ivers ide

Clinical Campus Master Plan
Scenario 8
Option A
Yellow (West)
Parking Ramp TEST FIT STUDY
(945 Spaces)
E Fairview Corp. SEPTEMBER 2005
North
525 23rd Ave. S. 2344 24th Ave. S.
P S
A Future Expansion Existing

B Boiler Plant
Health Partners 2406 Riverside Ave.
2220 6th St. S.
Riverside West Surface Parking Parking
(20 Spaces)
C 2312 6th St. S
Proposed
E St. Mary’s Campus College Children’s
E of St. Catherine
E 601 25th Ave. S.
Smiley’s Point E AC S
2211 Riverside Ave. E Visitor Vehicles
P E
E Surface
Parking Service Vehicles
Riverside
Professional (15 Spaces)
Underground
Building E Parking
606 24th Riverside East ‘A’
Parking 2414 7th St. S.
(228 Spaces) Building Entrance E
Ave S.
P Parking Entrance P
Riverside Rehabilitation
Center
Service Entrance S
E 2412 7th Ave. S.
E
E P P
Underground
Parking
0 100 200 300
Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 10

Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
6/2006 - 6/2008
i
w
f
n
a
a Phase I
t
s
c
e
t
i
g
e
l
r
m
i
a
g
t
t
m
y
e
t
d
September 2005

Campus Open Space

w
P arking
a s rh ai dn ig M.D.H.
st so on na hv oe t e l
p a r k i n g r a m p
B uilding
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
& s a f e t y b l d g

w e a v e r
V ehic ular
j a c k s o n
P ed's &
h a l l d e n s f o r d
h a l l Ambulance Traffic
Minor
m o l m e o c o u s l a r &
h e a l a E xis
t ting h
b
s
a
c
s
i
ci
be
ec
in
l
o
c s
t
l
le c
o
u
o
s i
w
l
g e
e
r
y P arking
n c
r s talls )
(804
e Shuttle Route
&
b i o m e d P ublic /
e n g i n . P atient
P W B
S taff
b o y n t o n h e a l t h
s e r mv a i y c o e m e m o r i a l b u P arkingi l d i n g
t e r r R eloc ated
i t o r i a l h a l l Automated Kiosk/Wayfinding
existing o a k s t r e e t
underground r a m p
parking
c
r
h
e
i
h
l
a
d
b
d i e h l h a l l One Way T raffic Service below grade parking level 1
v
c a r J cd i o
a r e Unit
s n t r A mbulatory C linic
& c a n c e r
r
c n t r C hildren's C linic E xpans ion
i
e f r o Hos
n pital
t i Ceenterr h A rea
a l l
p i o n e e r h a l l
t P arking
y
c 175,000 gs f footprint
l
u - Parking Level 1: 130(CH)+185(ACC)
b
r e a s t r i v e r r o a d p - Parking
a r Levelc 2: 750(CH+ACC)
e l
e - Total: 1,065 stalls
s
e
a
r
c T raffic F rom I-94
A mbulanc e h E as t & Wes t
E ntranc e c
n
t
r

NOR T H
0 100 200 300

Staging Plan
Staging plan: Cost and schedule Summary
Description Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Scenario 9

Children’s Hospital
(289 beds) Masonic/VFW Site Riverside Campus Block11, Adj.to Dinnaken Blk
Stage 1 Cost $177,200,000 $173,900,000 $229,800,000
Stage 2 Cost $163,800,000 $116,800,000 $156,700,000
Total Cost $341,000,000 $290,700,000 $386,500,000
Stage 1 Completion 1st Qtr 2011 2nd Qtr 2010 4th Qtr 2010
Stage 2 Completion 2nd Qtr 2014 2nd Qtr 2013 4th Qtr 2013
Ambulatory Care Clinic Block 12-Dinnaken Block Block 12-Dinnaken Block Block 12-Dinnaken Block
Cost $215,900,000 $215,900,000 $213,000,000
Completion 4th Qtr 2009 4th Qtr 2009 4th Qtr 2009
Conclusion and Recommendation

While significant work remains in finalizing program and financial frame-
work for both the Children’s Hospital facilities and the Ambulatory Care
Clinic, the siting analysis appears to point towards the Riverside campus as
the preferred site for the Children’s facilities and Block 12 (Dinnaken) as the
preferred site for the ACC. The Steering Committee will focus it future ef-
forts only on these two sites.

02 Scenario 7:A
02 SCENARIO 7
SCENARIO DESCRIPTIONS & PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS

General Description
SCENARIO 7 considers the Phase I revitalization of the Clinical Sciences
Campus by implementing the following elements:
• Development of a replacement Children’s Hospital on the current site of the
Masonic/VFW Hospital, with linkages to PWB and Unit J.
• Acquisition and adaptive reuse of the current Minnesota Department of
Health Building (MDH) when the Department of Health vacates to its new
facility
• Relocation of the existing VFW/Masonic program to the MDH building
Program Assumptions
Children’s Hospital Macro Program:
• Proposed Site Location: Masonic/VFW Site 53,800 GSF (1.23
acres)
• Facility Profile:
– 289 Beds
OB 59 Beds
Med/Surg 101 Beds
NICU 52 Beds
Adolescent MH 38 Beds
Adolescent MH Sub-Acute 14 Beds
Adolescent CD/Dual Diag 25 Beds
• Average BGSF/ Bed 1,934 BGSF/Bed
• Total Children’s Hospital Size 559,000 BGSF
• Parking Requirements: Fairview Garage after Clinic Relocation
– Includes pediatric clinic space
– Excludes pediatric faculty physical consolidation
Source: LarsonAllen Children’s Macro Space Program: Draft #3.1 Dated: 9/21/05
(Attached Exhibit 7A).
ISSUES
• Children’s program/service/support functions greater than anticipated
in McKensey study and LarsonAllen translation to space needs.
• Despite co-location to Unit J, Diehl Hall location and operational
space challenges within “undersized” Unit J yield less sharing of space
and services between proposed Children’s and Unit J
• On-going study will refine the potential sharing of functions and
space between proposed Children’s and Unit J.

02 Scenario 7:A
– Operating Room Quantities and Configurations

Will be based on new surgical volume estimates
May increase pediatric OR’s to 10+ Operating Rooms
Creates OR capacity issues between Children’s and Unit J
– Nursing Floor Configurations
Nursing leadership has expressed concerns regarding Children’s
Hospital floor size and configuration within the available site
geometry with respect to:
· Patient room size
· Ability to achieve 2 units of 24 rooms on each floor
· Patient room configuration and window configuration
· Nursing unit design and flow
– Imaging
Anticipates pediatric imaging will be within Children’s Hospital
– Patient Flow
Patient flow from Children’s Hospital to Unit J hampered by
Harvard Street and Diehl Hall locations
Patient flow issues may drive more pediatric D/T services to
Children’s Hospital.
• Phase II single site consolidation for the clinical enterprise is under
further study to determine, from a Clinical Campus Partners
perspective, a mutually acceptable road map and sequencing plan for
consolidation.
• Capital Needs: Cost of the Children’s Hospital may exceed $300M
and may require a phased implementation plan. The plan needs to
resolve both short and long term functionality, operational efficiency
and competitiveness. (Staging plan detail attached Exhibit 7B)
• As of this writing, no program backfill nor remodel budgeting has
been included for areas of Unit J vacated by Children’s programs.
– Relocation of adult programs from Riverside?
– Private room scheme advancement?
Ambulatory Care Clinic Program Assumptions

• Proposed Site Location: Dinnaken Block 108,000 GSF (2.48 acres)
• Facility Profile
– 340,000 BGSF (8 floors @ 42,000 GSF/floor)
Clinic medical programs 208,000 BGSF
Clinic support and admin 30,000 BGSF
· 7 ambulatory operating rooms
· Expanded Imaging Center
Exclusions
· Dental clinic
· Ophthalmology offices and Lion Eye Bank
· Psychiatry (Adult)
· Research/Academic Offices
· Consolidated Labs
16
02 Scenario 7:A
· Inpatient GCRC
· Boynton Health Systems Clinic
– Parking Requirements 600 patient spaces
• Volume Projections
– 2004 annual 318,000 visits
– 2014 projected annual 363,000 visits
Source: Ambulatory Care Center Interim Report by LarsonAllen, February 7, 2005
(Attached Exhibit 7C).
Minnesota Department of Health Building (MDH)

(Swing Space):
• Building Location: 717 Delaware Street
– MDH Space Available: 197, 350 SF
Programmable Office Space: 81,700 SF
Programmable Lab Space: 44,100 SF
Non-Programmable Space: 71,500 SF
– VFW/Masonic Program Space Needed: 67,500 SF
Programmable Office/Exam: 43,750 SF
Programmable Lab Space: 17,000 SF
Non-Programmable Space: 25,800 SF
• Assumptions:
– Masonic Day Hospital relocates to Unit J or Riverside
– Some Exam/Treatment functions may need to exchange with office
space from PWB.
Source: Minnesota Department of Administration and Academic Health Center
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
• No program backfill has been identified for PWB following relocation of
UMP clinics to the ACC
• No parking demand nor availability has been identified for potential PWB
backfill program
• No program has been identified for vacant portions of MDH after Masonic/
VFW programs have been relocated to MDH.

02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7A
Children’s Hosptial Macro Program

The following key assumptions drive this Macro Space Program for the Uni-
versity of Minnesota Children’s Hospital at Masonic-VFW:
1. The proposed facility will be located on the East Campus, on land

vacated by the Masonic-VFW buildings, and linked to Unit J and
PWB.
2. Phase 1 will occur in two stages. Generally, all pediatric inpatient beds,
surgery, and imaging will relocate to the new facility in Stage 1. During
Stage 2, OB, NICU, and Adolescent Behavioral Services will relocate
from the Riverside Campus to the Children’s Hospital on the East
Campus.
3. The revised number of Children’s facility related beds (version dates
6.30.05 and 8.10.05 update; source Fairview) will be:
Service Beds
OB (3 triage; 10 antepartum; 15 LDR’s; 31 Post Partum) 59
Med&Surg (56)/PICU (24)/BMT(21) 101
NICU 52
Adolescent MH 38
Adolescent MH Sub-Acute 14
Adolescent CD/Dual Diagnosis 25
TOTAL 289
4. Offices for the Pediatric Primary Care Clinic, Pediatric Surgeons, and a
“Gold Key” pediatric specialty clinic will be on the Children’s Hospital
site. Two modules of 15 exam rooms each will be provided (capacity
of 74,000 visits per year (two visits per room per hour, 7 hours per day.
252 days per year, at 70 percent utilization)
5. Offices for Maternal/Fetal Medicine physicians will be on the Children’s
Hospital site during Stage 2.
6. Offices for Adolescent Behavioral Services will be on the Children’s
7. Pediatric surgery will occur in dedicated operating rooms within
Children’s. Ten operating rooms will be provided.
8. Pediatric imaging will be provided in the Children’s Hospital. Pediatric
C/V invasive imaging may occur within Children’s.
9. All rooms will be private, including PICU, NICU and
Behavioral.

At 2,600 births, with a 30 percent c-section rate, 30 post partum beds would
be needed at a 65 percent occupancy level. This considers a 2.2 day ALOS for
normal vaginal births; 4.0 day ALOS for c-section births. At 2,600 births, up to
10 – 12 LDR’s (including one ICU) would be needed, assuming appropriate use
of triage beds (not LDR’s) for ruling in/out labor. LarsonAllen does not have
data to determine if 10 antepartum rooms are needed.

52 beds suggested in Version 6.30.05.
18
02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7A
10. All med/surg rooms will be sized to accommodate families, and be

designed in the “Adopt a Room” concept.
11. Dr. Schreiber would like his fragmented pediatric department
consolidated. He has 110 faculty and an unknown number of staff.
Assuming 3.5 staff per faculty, this would be 385 staff plus 110
faculty. Assuming 500 people at 200 BGSF per person, an additional
100,000 BGSF would be needed just for offices. THIS ESTIMATE,
HOWEVER, IS LOWERED TO 70 FACULTY AND 1.5 STAFF PER
FACULTY, FOR A TOTAL OF 175 PEOPLE AT 200 BGSF PER
PERSON, RESULTING IN 35,000 BGSF.
THE “STRAW DOG”

Description of Major Phases:
Phase 1 consists of a free-standing Children’s Hospital, with all inpatient fa-
cilities replaced in new construction. It is completed in two stages (de-
scribed below). Unit J and Mayo will still be utilized for location of selected
administrative and support services.
At the end of Phase 1, the Riverside Campus is relatively unchanged.
Phase 2 is consistent with other previous scenarios. It consists of replacing all

Riverside adult inpatient and outpatient services (with/without Behavioral Ser-
vices) on the East Campus. This may be accomplished via vertical expansion of
the new Children’s Hospital and/or Unit J, or in combination with horizontal
expansion onto selected adjacent dorm sites (if available in the future.
At the end of Phase 2, the Riverside Campus could be reconfigured for other
UMMC or Fairview services, and/or sold.
Description of Phase 1, Stages 1 and 2:
Phase 1 is predicated on the following:
• Adult services remain in Unit J and on the Riverside Campus. This includes
general medical/surgical inpatient and outpatient services, the Orthopedic
Department and Clinics, the Sports Medicine Surgery Center, and all
behavioral services. In addition, other post-acute care functions in the 2512
Building remain.
• Adult and pediatric services will not intermix among inpatient, surgical and
imaging services.
• BMT/SOT will relocate to the new Children’s facility n Stage 1 and
pediatric patients will use existing radiation therapy services in Unit J.
• In Stage 1, NICU and OB will remain in their existing Riverside facilities,
with opportunity provided for future NICU expansion in existing facilities.
• In Stage 1, Adolescent Behavioral Services will remain in their existing
Riverside facilities, with some (undefined) level of refurbishment.
• Pediatric inpatient and outpatient surgery department will be situated in
new construction. Ten operating rooms and related support spaces will be
provided for pediatrics. This will “free-up” four to six operating rooms in
Unit J, allowing for growth and backfill, and/or renovation to create more
appropriately sized operating rooms and support spaces.

02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7A
• The Unit J Pediatric Imaging Department will be relocated to new

construction. It will be part of a Diagnostic Service Core which includes
imaging, cardiology, specimen collection, and neurodiagnostic services.
Imaging equipment currently within the Unit J Imaging department will be
relocated to the new facility.
• The existing Unit J Emergency entrance will be used by both adults and
pediatric patients. A triage function will separate adults and children, with
children using a new Pediatric Emergency Department in new construction.
Convenient vertical transportation will be provided between the Peds ED
and PICU, NICU, and other key pediatric services.
• Additional parking will be required when Stage 2 functions relocate from
Riverside to the East Campus (i.e., NICU, OB, and adolescent behavioral
(inpatient and outpatient). Hence,
UMMC may need to consider some level of underground parking directly
beneath the Pediatric Hospital (spaces to be determined).
• Pediatric faculty offices will be situated in existing East Campus areas, unless
opportunity (and capital) exists for consolidation of spaces in or near the
new Children’s facility (i.e., in PWB after the ACC is operational)).
Phase 1, Stages 1 and 2, are depicted in visuals provided by HGA
20
02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7A
Space Drivers Estimated PHASE 1 LOCATION PHASE 1 S.F.

Department/Function DGSF Comments/Modalities (DGSF)
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 1 Stage 2
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Accounting 2 staff 300 2 workstations N/A N/A

Administration 6 people 1,500 COO; Financial; Physician Leader; New New 1,500
Patient Care (1); Secretary (2); files;
workroom; conference room
Admitting/Registration/Financial 4 staff; 1 coordinator 1,500 5 offices; workroom; waiting New New 1,500
Counseling
Birth and Family Education 6 staff and classroom 1,500 Existing New 1,500
Business Office 2 staff 300 2 Workstations New New 300
Child/Life 8 staff (?) 1,600 Could be decentralized on nursing New New 1,600
units
Communications/Marketing 3 staff 600 New New 600
Family Resource Center 1-2 staff 1,000 Library; kiosks; storage New New 1,000
Foundation 2 staff 600 2 offices; waiting; workroom New New 600
Information Services 6 persons 2,500 5 workstations; 1 office; small New New 2,500
computer room; storage; burn-in area;
3 data closets
Health Information Services/Q.M/ 8 staff 1,600 7 workstations; 1 office; minimal files; New New 1,600
Risk Management. ROI; EPIC (digital/paperless)
Human Resources 4 staff and files 800 Existing Existing
Medical Staff Facilities 800 Physician lounge; records completion; New New 800
toilet
Meditation Room 600 New New 600
Patient Care Administration 8 staff 2,000 3 Supervisors; 1 care manager; 2 New New 2,000
staff/scheduling; 1-Infection Control;
1-Educ.; conference room
Volunteers/Gift Shop 1,000 In public lobby; gift shop; In separate New New 1,000 ____
area, volunteer check-in, office
Subtotal 18,900 15,600 1,500

Department/Function DGSF Comments/Modalities (by floor) (DGSF)
AMBULATORY/DIAGNOSTIC/
TREATMENT SERVICES
Behavioral Faculty Offices 30 staff 6,000 Guesstimate Existing New 6,000

Cardiopulmonary Services 3,000 No interventional; includes respiratory New New 3,000
therapy, Blood Gas; non-invasive
cardiology (4 procedure rooms)
Emergency Services 10,000 visits 6,000 Majority are behavioral visits; 5 exam/ New New 6,000
(underestimated?) consult rooms; 3 exam/treatment
rooms; 1 major exam/treatment room;
waiting; 1 negative air room
Home Health 3-4 staff 600 New New 600
Integrative Medicine 2 staff 600 New New 600
Laboratory 8 staff on day shift 3,000 Existing Existing
- NICU Stat Lab 300 Existing New 300
- PICU Stat Lab 300 New New 300
- Surgery Stat Lab 300 New New 300
- Outpatient Spec. Collect. 1,000 New New 1,000
Lactation Area 3 Lactation rooms 800 Near OB/Nursery Existing New 800
1 office
Maternal/Fetal Medicine Clinic 6 exam rooms; 4 4,000 Existing New 4,000
and Offices offices (shared)
Medical Imaging 1 CT; 1 MRI 12,600 Major interventional in Unit J. Sedation New New 12,600
1 R&F Unit area included.
1 Rad Unit
2 Ultrasound
1 Nuclear
1 Interventional Room

02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7A

TREATMENT SERVICES
Neurodiagnostics 3 procedure rooms 1,200 New New 1,200
Outpatient Behavioral Health 40,000 All outpatient programs and offices Existing New 40,000
Services/Department Offices
Pediatric Clinic and “Gold Key” 19,000+ primary 18,000 Two modules of 15 exam rooms each New New 18,000
Clinic care visits/year
Pediatric Outreach 2-3 positions 600 New New 600
Pharmacy 6 staff on day shift 2,600 Use Pyxis throughout hospital; IV add Existing New 2,600
room; 1 pick station; solution storage;
office; Satellites on units
Radiation Therapy 1 Linac plus support 5,700 Provide with BMT Services Existing Existing
Rehab Services 5,000 PT/OT/Speech/Audiology; inpatient Existing New 5,000
only
Surgery/Recovery/Ambulatory 4,400 – 6,000 30,000 New New 30,000
Surgery cases in 2013; 10
operating rooms;
2 minor procedure
rooms
_________ ______ ______
Subtotal 141,300 74,200 58,700

PATIENT CARE UNITS
Med/Surg/PICU Units Universal Rooms 101,000 101 @ 1,000 DGSF/bed; very high by New 101,000
today’s standards
Birthing/Perinatal Services 34 PP/15 LDR/10 59,000 1,000 DGSF/bed; Above or below Existing New 59,000
antenatal/ 3 c- Surgery
section/ 33 nursery
Mental Health/CD 77 Beds 46,200 @ 600 DGSF/bed; all private rooms; Existing New 46,200
group rooms; dining; activity; school
rooms; staff support areas
NICU 52 Beds 28,600 @ 550 DGSF/bed Existing New 28,600
_________ ______ ______
Subtotal 289 beds 234,800 101,000 133,800
22
02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7A

ANCILLARY AND SUPPORT
SERVICES
Biomedical Engineering 4 technician 2,000 Work area; equipment cueing; parts Existing Existing
storage
Central Processing Services 4,000 CPC off-site; case cart prep; main Existing Existing
supply storage for facility
Employee Facilities 1,000 Male/Female locker rooms; toilets/ Existing? Existing?
showers
Housekeeping/Linen 2,500 5 decentralized janitor closets; New – New – 2,500
chemical/paper/storage; equipment Decentralized Decentralized
storage; clean-up; cribs/beds storage closets; closets;
Existing Existing
Maintenance/Plant Operations 4.5 staff/day 4,000 Parts; shops; office; plan room; paint Existing Existing
booth; tool room; use Unit J for
selected functions
Materials Management 4,000 Break-out area; staging area; Dirty Existing Existing
cart hold; soiled linen cart hold; Gas
Cylinder Storage; recyclables
Nutrition Services 13,000 Limited; kitchen; servery; dining for Existing? Existing?
150
On-Call Rooms 10 rooms 2,000 Private room; shared toilets/showers Existing New 2,000
Public Reception/Lobby 3,000 Lobby; toilet; resting areas New New 3,000
Storage – General 2,000 Existing Existing
_________ ______ _____
Subtotal 37,500 5,500 2,000

EDUCATION
Auditorium 200 seats; theatre 8,000 Existing Existing

style
Conference/Classrooms 3,000 Mix of large and small rooms; New New 3,000
computer training room; video
conferencing
Library/Media Center 1,500 New New 1,500
Medical Education Offices 1,000 New New 1,000
Medical Student Work Areas 1,000 New New 1,000
________ ______ ______
Subtotal 14,500 6,500 0
TOTAL NEW DGSF 447,000 202,800 196,000
NEW BGSF @ 1.25 DGSF 559,000 Building Gross Square Feet 253,500 245,000
BGSF / Bed 1,934 289 beds
ADD: Faculty Support Space 70 faculty plus 1.5 35,000 Existing Existing
support per staff =
175 staff

02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7B
Children’s Hospital Staging Summary
Phase 1 Children’s Hospital on Riverside New Const Shell-out Remodel

Stage 1 - New Construction DGSF DGSF DGSF
Med/Surg/PICU Beds (101 beds) 101,000
OR’s (10 each) 30,000
Imaging 12,600
Cardio 3,000
ER 6,000
Neurodiagnostics 1,200
Labs/STAT 1,600
Pedatric Clinic/Outreach 18,600
Integrative Medicine 600
Lobby/Ancill/Support 5,500
Administration 15,600
Education 6,500
Home Health 600
SubTotal Phase 1 Stage 1 202,800 -

Factor to Convert to BGSF 1.25 1.25
Total Stage 1 BGSF 253,500 -
Stage 1-Parking
Fairview PV post ACC relocate -
Existing Space to be Remodeled To Be Determined
Assumptions:
Ortho stays at Riv-East/2512
Adults stay at Riv-East/West
BMT stays at Unit J
OB stays at Riv-East
Nicu stays at Riv-East
Adol MH stays at Riv-North
24
02 Scenario 7:B
Exhibit 7B
Stage 2 - Expansion to Stage 1 vertical and D/T horizontal

NICU (52 beds) 28,600
OB (59 beds) 59,000
Adol Mental Health (77 beds) 46,200
Birth & Family Ed 1,500
Behavioral Faculty Offices 6,000
NICU Stat Lab 300
Maternal/Fetal Clinic Office 4,000
Lactation Area 800
Outpatient Behavioral Services 40,000
Pharmacy 2,600
Rehab Services 5,000
Ancillary & Support 2,000
Subtotal Phase 1 Stage 2 196,000 -

Existing Space to be Remodeled

???
Assumptions:
Stage 1&2 provides a Materially Stand-Alone Children’s & Women’s Hospital

Adults stay at Riv-East/West until future phase development occurs
Phase 2
Future Phase Single Site Consolidation would most likely be
Adjacent to Unit J/Children’s on the Diehl/SW Mayo Site
Adjacent to Unit J on the Pioneer Hall Dorm Site

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
DATE: February 7, 2005

TO: Patti Andreini-Arnold
FROM: Les Leider
RE: ACC INTERIM REPORT

Please let this document serve as an interim report on the progress made
towards verifying the size of the proposed Ambulatory Care Center (ACC).
This document includes key materials developed during our meetings, which
began in August 2004 and concluded in November 2004. These meetings in-
cluded representatives from the Academic Health Center (AHC), University
of Minnesota Physicians (UMPhysicians), and Fairview-University Medical
Center (F-UMC). In addition to these meetings, three UMPhysician de-
partment meetings were conducted (Ophthalmology, Women’s Services, and
Neurology) as well as two meetings addressing the Clinical Laboratory con-
solidation concept.
With respect to the Clinical Laboratory, the consolidated Lab most likely will
not be housed in the proposed ACC. A STAT Lab will be available to serve
ACC patients and, perhaps, the proposed Children’s Hospital patients.
This report will summarize the following key topics and directions discussed
during this time.
1. ACC Planning Principles
2. ACC Components and Master Zoning
3. Data Sources
4. Clinical Research
5. Ambulatory Care Teaching
6. Boynton Health Services
7. Historical and Estimated Service Volumes
8. Estimated Exam/Procedure Room Needs
9. Typical Module Description
10. Space Requirements
An appendix is included which contains the spreadsheets supporting volume

and exam room estimates.
We stand ready to renew our work effort and finalize space and capital es-
timates for the proposed ACC. Please call with any questions or need for
further clarification.
Thank you.
26
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
1. ACC Planning Principles

During the Clinical Campus Planning timeframe in 2004, overall planning
principles were developed to guide the development of Campus renewal
concepts. These principles served as the basis for ACC planning, but were
slightly modified.
From the 2004 Clinical Campus Plan preface:
“The partnership between Fairview Health Services, the University of Min-

nesota Academic Health Center, and the University of Minnesota Physicians
brings together the resources of these organizations to create a nationally and
internationally respected, distinctive Academic Health Center.
Over the past seven years the partners have invested heavily in organizational
integration, technology, people, and program. A trajectory for success of the
partnership has been established. It is now time to develop a strategic capital
plan for the facilities needed to sustain the partnership vision
Clinical Campus Master Planning Vision

The Clinical Campus Plan for the Academic Health Center will create the
physical environment necessary to support the partnership’s long term goal of
being a top tier academic health center, demonstrating national and interna-
tional excellence in patient care, research, and health professional education.
The Clinical Campus Plan will be the bricks and mortar translation of the
Fairview – University of Minnesota partnership vision. Through shared capi-
tal investment in a renewed Clinical Campus, a new level of programmatic,
physical, financial, and emotional ownership of the partnership vision will be
reached.”
Master Clinical Campus Planning Principles
The Clinical Campus Plan will:
1. Be guided by a long range vision of being a top tier patient care,

education, and research institution; and shaped by the core of
programmatic priorities of the partners.
2. Support integrated inpatient and outpatient care delivery, including the
move to a “single site” Fairview-University Medical Center.
3. Emphasize responsible use of resources – both capital and operations.
Duplication is to be tenaciously avoided; facility adjacencies supporting
capital and operating efficiency will be pursued.
4. Be driven by an external customer focus. The Clinical Campus will
create a welcoming identity for visitors, patients, family, students,
faculty, and staff. For clinical facilities, patient and family access and
service will be the primary priority.
5. Have mission focal points – for education, research, and patient care
– which will deliberately link to each other. Zoning of the Academic
Health Center will reflect these missions.
6. Take advantage of the character of a large, urban, University while

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
creating “community space” for interaction and reflection. Site

efficiency will be maximized.
7. Be an asset to investment in recruitment and retention of students,
faculty, and staff. Quality of facilities will be a key component of
competitive positioning.
8. Support continued involvement of community-based physicians in
patient care programs. Ease of access and operational orientation will
increase attractiveness to the private practice community.
9. Be driven by life cycle facility planning. Sequencing of individual
facility decisions based upon responsible continued use of facilities with
outstanding debt and operational effectiveness will be emphasized by
both Fairview and the University.
10. Both reflect and impact University-wide planning for transportation,
parking, student housing, stadiums, energy, and other initiatives. The
Clinical Campus planning process should link closely with University-
wide planning.
11. Fairview-wide planning and impacts need to be recognized.
12. Be respectful of the University and the Fairview – University campus as
part of a larger urban community. The plan will engender the support
of key external stakeholders.
ACC PLANNING GOALS

In addition to the Master Clinical Campus Planning Principles, more specific
ACC facility goals and principles have been developed. These goals and prin-
ciples are consistent with the overall Clinical Camps principles.
• The proposed ACC facility will accommodate all UMPhysicians (hospital
and non-hospital based) ambulatory clinical practices and UMPhysicians or
UMPhysicians/F-UMC provided diagnostic services (such as imaging, non-
invasive cardiology, ambulatory surgery, etc.).
• Clinic space for Community Physicians will be provided within or adjacent
to the ACC.
• Optimal sharing of resources between the ACC, Children’s Hospital and
Unit J will be pursued.
• Operational efficiency will be enhanced through standardized clinic module
design based on a standardized patient care model and ambulatory teaching
approach, throughput and utilization factors (i.e., room utilization, hours of
operation, resource sharing, etc.).
• A single site ACC, with adjacent or close parking, will enhance patient
access and public visibility.
• “One-Stop” patient access is highly desirable (clinics and diagnostics are
situated within the ACC and potential same-day scheduling for most
services is available).
• Clinical and diagnostic revenue must support ACC facility and operational
costs.
Added during ACC planning.

Source: HGA/KSA; Initially modified by LarsonAllen; ACC Planning Group revisions.
28
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
• The ACC will be designed to allow for unique expression of donor funded
programs (i.e., Masonic)
PLANNING PRINCIPLES
• Riverside will close within a 20 year timeframe. Any clinic relocated to
the ACC or East Campus prior to that time will require related diagnostic/
therapeutic and acute care functions to be situated on the East Campus as
well.
• The ACC will not accommodate non-UMPhysicians – F-UMC joint
venture programs.
• If the Clinical Lab is not consolidated within or close to the ACC, a
dedicated Lab will be required to serve ambulatory patients.
• ACC spaces will be planned based on known physician recruitment plans
and/or moderate estimates of growth for each clinic.
• Patients will be seen in practice space Monday through Friday utilizing the
space over the whole week. Some practices may operate on weekend days.
Practices that cannot fill all ten half-days of clinic time will share space with
other practices or use unfilled time for clinical research clinics.
• Exam rooms will be standardized at 120 net square feet (specialized
equipment will be accommodated if required).
• AHC will be responsible for lease costs associated with faculty offices within
the ACC.
• Departmental non-clinical offices will not be in this building.
• Clinic staff private offices will be assigned based on pre-determined criteria.
• Staff and patient support spaces will be centralized or consolidated among
modules to assure optimal space efficiencies.
• Office, exam, procedure and other support space room sizes will be
standardized to assure optimal flexibility in the short and long term use of
space.
• GCRC functions will be incorporated into the ACC design. Centralized
and decentralized spaces will be provided.
• The ACC will be planned in a fiscally responsible manner based on agreed
upon utilization of space, hours of operation, program adjacencies and/or
consolidations, standardized flexible spaces, etc.
• All Pediatric services will not be provided within a centralized Pediatric
Center. Pediatric patients will be seen in the respective specialist/sub-
specialist clinic, unless otherwise scheduled within the Pediatric Center.
• The Pediatric Center will be horizontally linked to the replacement
Children’s Hospital, or situated within the new structure itself.
2. ACC Components and Master Zoning

From the 2002 KSA/HGA ACC report, a concept for “master zoning,”
(grouping of related functions) was developed. Using this concept as a start-
ing discussion point, the planning team modified it as follows. Key drivers
included rational practice proximities and synergies, as well as opportunities
for resource sharing between practices/departments.

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
Practice Grouping #1 – Primary Care and Medicine

• Family Practice (Primary Care)
• Medicine
• Pediatrics
• Allergy/Asthma
• Psychiatry (remains at Riverside until All Behavioral Services
relocated to East Campus)
• Gateway/Star Clinic (?)
Practice Grouping #2 – Cancer Center
• Cancer Center – Oncology (includes Infusion)
• Cancer Center – Radiation Therapy
• BMT
• Solid Organ
• Transplant Center
Practice Grouping #3 – Surgery Center and Musculoskeletal
• Surgery
• Colon/Rectal
• GI
• Urology
• Prostate Center
• Dermatology
• Orthopedics
• Rheumatology
• PM&R
• Cutaneous Surgery
• Musculoskeletal Imaging
Practice Grouping #4 – Neurosciences Center
• ENT
• Audiology
• Ophthalmology
• Neurology
• Neurosurgery
• Neuro Diagnostics
Practice Grouping #5 – Cardiovascular Center
• Cardiovascular
• CV & T Surgery
• Vascular Surgery/Wound Healing
• Pulmonology
• Cardiopulmonary Diagnostics
30
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
• Vascular Lab
• Pulmonary Function Lab
Practice Grouping #6 – Women’s Services
• Reproductive Center
• Women’s Health Center
• Breast Center
• U Specialists in Women’s Health
Other (proximities to be determined)
• Retail/Lobby/Information
• GCRC
• STAT Lab
• Diagnostic Core (specimen collection; imaging; (need to decide
if pediatric diagnostics physically split from Adult diagnostics;
most likely if proposed Children’s Hospital shares diagnostics with
ambulatory functions)
- CT
- MR
- Ultrasound
- Radiographic
- Mammography
- Stereotactic Mammography
- Dexa
- Fluoroscopy
- Nuclear Medicine
- PET
- Other?
• Ambulatory Surgery
• PT/OT
• Dietary
• Supply Chain (Materials Management)
• Hotel Services
• Administrative Services
• Education Center
• Delaware Street
• Dental (?)
3. Data Sources
Clinical Research
• Clinical Research Task Force Report – Executive Summary (no specific date;
assume within last 2 years); Co-chairs were Dr. Russell Luepker (School
of Public Health) and Dr. Charles Schulz (Medical School). Ex Officio
member was Dr. Mark Paller (AHC).
• Clinical Research interviews with Dr. Mark Paller and Dr. Betsy Seaquist
(Medical School).

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
• Survey of Academic Health Centers on the Financial and Administrative

Aspects of Conducting and Managing Clinical Trials, Woodruff Health
Sciences Center, Emory university, July 2004.
Ambulatory Care Teaching Approaches
• Academic Health Centers – Clinical Research/Residency Programs,
Ambulatory Care Centers, LarsonAllen, November 2004.
Planning Documents and Volume Data
• KSA/HGA, Worksession and Final Documents, November 2002 – March
2003
• UMPhysicians Imaging Center Volume Data, 2004 (nine months)
• Surgery Volume Projections through 2013, F-UMC, October 2004
• Reconciled UMPhysician Clinic Visit Volumes, 2004 and 2014
• LarsonAllen Exam Room Need Determination Methodology
4. Clinical Research
The planning team sought input from individuals responsible/knowledge-
able about clinical research and how it should be integrated into the ACC.
From review of the Clinical Research Task Force Report (AHC), the Emory
University survey, and the two interviews with Drs. Paller and Seaquist, the
following findings and/or conclusions were reached:
a. The Task Force defined clinical research as “investigations that involve

direct contact with patients, using scientific methods to answer
questions about disease mechanisms, diagnosis, prevention and
treatment.”
b. Like other AHC’s, the UofMN AHC does not centrally track clinical
trial activity in a single database. Hence, precise volume data is not
available. Estimates are prevalent, but it may be difficult to coalesce all
data to assist in determining centralized and/or decentralized facility
requirements.
c. Like other AHC’s, the UofMN AHC does not feel that an optimal
operating model is in place. Many faculty and researchers within many
departments and schools are involved in trials funded by the NIH and
other sources. Drs. Paller and Seaquist are themselves not comfortable
with identifying the “optimal” model.
d. The GCRC has approximately 10,000 GSF and may require the same
amount if replaced.
e. Inpatient related clinical research will need to continue to coordinate
activities with F-UMC inpatient facilities. Outpatient activities could
occur in individual clinics, in specialized centers, or in the GCRC.
f. For planning purposes, LarsonAllen will consider the following:
• The GCRC will not be replaced in the ACC. If it needs to be
relocated, a range of 8,000 – 10,000 GSF should be considered for
macro planning purposes.
• The Task Force recommendation that a 60,000 GSF clinical research
facility be constructed is not supported with programmatic and
volume driven data.
32
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
• Some clinical research will occur in the individual clinic modules,

and be conducted as part of the normal clinic activity. Shared
and non-assigned office space (with file cabinets for hard copy
storage) will be provided in each clinic for research staff. However,
permanent research staff offices will be elsewhere outside of the ACC.
• One module will be dedicated for scheduled clinical trial clinics.
Adequate equipment and supply storage will be provided to house
a variety of clinical research trial needs. One module with 12 exam
rooms, operated eight hours per day, five days per week, would be
able to accommodate 24,200 visits per year (average one hour visits
per room).
5. Ambulatory Care Teaching

As ACC operational aspects are more refined, there is concern expressed
by some UMPhysician representatives and faculty that current ambulatory
teaching models need to be updated, predictable and somewhat standardized.
Each department and each faculty physician have multiple approaches to de-
veloping the needed clinical skills in the ambulatory care setting.
Issues relative to scheduling, number of concurrent residents/students/fel-

lows, case review approach, etc., will need to be addressed in subsequent dis-
cussions.
This study does not include in-depth research on optimal ambulatory teach-
ing models. In reviewing descriptions of the ambulatory care teaching ap-
proaches at George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington
University School of Medicine, and the University of Maryland School of
Medicine, many similarities in approaches and objectives were comparable
to UofMN. Maryland assures it’s residents rotations in HMOs, private prac-
tices, and well as academic settings.
Due to the lack of clarity in revising the ambulatory teaching model, Larson-
Allen approached the issue from a flexibility perspective:
• To optimize use of physical resources, clinic and physician schedulers must
coordinate use of rooms according to the particular faculty teaching style,
as long as one faculty member (and students, etc.) does not use more than
three exam rooms at once.
• With an average of 12 exam rooms per module, four “faculty-student”
pairings could concurrently take place.
• All ten half-days must be fully utilized to optimize use of space.
• Faculty and student conference areas will be available in each module.
6. Boynton Health Services

In late summer 2004, UofMN President Bruininks requested Frank Cerra,
MD, Senior Vice President for Health Sciences, consider the inclusion of
Boynton Health Services (BHS) (Minneapolis Campus facility) into Clinical
Campus planning. This request was intended to study BHS space needs for
replacement, as their building is over 50 years old and situated in prime space
for regenerating Academic Health Center facilities. Relocation was consid-
ered as part of the proposed ACC to potentially create efficiencies through

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
physical consolidation. This request was not intended to directly or indirectly

infer that BHS become organizationally or operationally part of the ACC.
LarsonAllen Health Care Group reviewed BHS documents to estimate po-

tential space needs for a replacement facility. These documents include:
• BHS Service and Business Model and Financial Analysis, October 2004
• BHS Service-and-Support Continuous Improvement Report (including
Appendices A – K-4), June 2003.
The review intended to rationalize future space needs in context of current

programmatic, operational, and facility factors. The study was not a detailed
review. It presents an understanding of how BHS programmatic structure,
and therefore staffing and space needs, is different than a typical community
health center or clinic.
Several key conclusions include:

• As a self-contained - self-supporting entity, BHS needs adequate space
to house clinicians and non-clinicians alike. Historically, they have
programmatically operated in a single facility and have worked towards full
integration of service and support. However, many non-clinical functions
could be housed in a separate facility from the direct patient care functions,
if BHS cannot be wholly situated into a new building due to space or capital
budget constraints.
• Space needs must be determined based on accommodating visit volume
during a nine month period (the traditional school year). Hence, exam/
procedure space should be based on 746 visits per day (clinic relate visits).
• Twenty three Family Practice, Internal Medicine and Gynecology physician
FTEs are calculated as needed to support these volumes. The number of
concurrently practicing physicians/providers is typically less than total FTEs
due to vacations, holidays, teaching responsibilities, etc. For planning
purposed (to be verified), 15 concurrently practicing providers should be
considered in the replacement medical clinic, translating into a need for 45
exam rooms. This would accommodate FY 05 visit volumes, and translate
into 3 – 15 room modules that could be flexibly designed for optimal
operational efficiency.
• BHS has no debt on its existing facility. New facilities will increase lease
payments, although should be somewhat mitigated by a more energy
efficient and well-designed facility.
• BHS cannot afford to share or transfer to other entities profitable services
like Eye, Laboratory, and Pharmacy, without compensation. Opportunities
to share non-clinical resources with AHC and/or UMPhysicians could
reduce the rate of expense growth while providing positive opportunities for
improvements to customer service.
• It is assumed that current staffing patterns are appropriate and will be
accommodated in space requirement calculations.
• Based on the preliminary assumptions identified throughout the BHS
report, including the concept that BHS would remain a self-contained
entity within the proposed ACC, the new facility would be more efficiently
designed, and that it will be a filmless and paperless facility, the preliminary
34
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
replacement facility estimate is 85,000 Gross Square Feet (GSF), reduced

from its existing 97,332 GSF.
7. Historical and Estimated Service Volumes
Imaging
Appendix 1A provides 2004 volume data for the University Imaging Center.
Imaging volumes were not projected by UMPhysicians to 2012. However,
assuming 2 – 4 percent growth per year to 2012, LarsonAllen suggests the
following number of modalities be considered (see Table 1).
The current understanding between F-UMC and UMPhysicians is that this

Center will not increase its number of modalities, unless a new contract be-
tween the two parties is approved. Space allocations will be made to accom-
modate the suggested number of modalities to serve the ambulatory patient
growth. Ownership, management, and economic relationships are not con-
sidered, just patient care needs.
UMPhysicians also indicated that perhaps 2 nuclear cameras, 2 mammog-

raphy and 1 breast ultrasound unit be considered for this Imaging Center.
These units will be included in sizing the future facility as well.
Table 1 does not consider Unit J (inpatient) or Pediatric Inpatient needs.
TABLE 1 – CURRENT AND SUGGESTED I

MAGING UNITS FOR THE ACC
Suggested
Modality Current 2012
CT 1 2
MR 1 2
Ultrasound 2 3
Dexa 1 1
Radiographic 2 3
Breast Ultrasound 1
Mammography 2
Surgery
The KSA/HGA documents suggested that six operating rooms be provided.
LarsonAllen reviewed up-to-date data, and volume estimates provided by F-
UMC (See Table 2). Nine potential outpatient operating rooms were calcu-
lated to accommodate 100 percent of the adult outpatient volume. Fifteen
operating rooms were calculated for the F-UMC adult inpatient population;
six operating rooms for the inpatient and outpatient pediatric population.
Appendix 1B displays the methodology for determining the number of future
operating rooms.
For ACC planning, seven outpatient operating rooms (and required PACU/
pre/post areas) will be planned. This would accommodate approximately 80
percent of the adult outpatient surgical cases.

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 2 – SUMMARY OF CURRENT AND

ESTIMATED SURGERY VOLUMES
Statistic1 2001 2002 2003 2004 (F) 2008 (E) 2013 (E)
Adult
- Inpatient 8,943 8,915 8,956 8,546 8,632 8,985
- Outpatient 7,719 7,607 7,263 6,861 6,932 7,215
- TOTAL 16,662 16,522 16,219 15,407 15,564 16,200
Pediatric
- Inpatient 1,869 1,755 1,647 1,863 1,883 1,960
- Outpatient 2,188 2,298 2,693 2,581 2,606 2,712
- TOTAL 4,057 4,053 4,340 4,444 4,489 4,672
Adult and Peds

- Inpatient 10,812 10,670 10,603 10,409 10,515 10,945
- Outpatient 9,907 9,905 9,956 9,442 9,538 9,927
GRAND TOTAL 20,719 20,575 20,559 19,851 20,053 20,872
Source: F-UMC Administration, November 2004
Clinic Volumes
UMPhysicians updated clinic visit volume data in Fall 2004. It differs some-
what from the historical data presented in the 2002/2003 KSA/HGA ACC
report in that counting methods may have changed and procedural data was
estimated.
This updated Clinic volume data was then estimated for year 2014 by assum-
ing three growth scenarios: 0%(sustain); 2% (moderate); and 4% (high).
The difficulty encountered in volume projections related to tying physician
recruitment and retention plans, and Department/Service Line business plans,
to volume growth. Hence, 2014 moderate volume estimates will be used for
estimating exam room and space needs (next section). See Appendix B.
Table 3, beginning on the next page, summarizes reconciled 2004 and esti-
mated 2014 clinic visit volumes based on the moderate growth model.
With respect to Pediatrics, current and estimated general and subspecialty

pediatric volumes represent about 15 percent of total volumes (source: UM-
Physicians Summary of Projections, November 2004). The vast majority of
pediatric subspecialty visits occur in the “adult” clinics. Pediatric subspecialty
visit volume is generally very low in these clinics, thus making it difficult for
these sub specialists to efficiently schedule “pediatric clinic days” in the Pedi-
atric Clinic area.
36
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 3 – CLINIC VISIT VOLUMES, 2004 AND 2014

Practice Grouping 2004 (F) 2014 (E)
Primary Care and Medicine

- Family Medicine (Primary Care) 26,868 32,752
- Medicine 8,293 10,109
- Pediatrics 15,626 19,048
- Allergy/Asthma 3,158 3,850
- Psychiatry 17,700 21,576
- Gateway/Star Clinic (?) 3,700 4,510
Subtotal 75,345 91,845
Visits / Day (252 days/year) 299 365
Cancer Center
- Oncology (visits) 14,750 17,980
- Oncology (infusions) 8,500 10,362
- Radiation Therapy ? ?
- BMT 16,547 20,171
- Transplant Center (includes Solid Organ?) 25,453 31,027
Subtotal 65,250 79,540
Surgery Center and Musculoskeletal
- Surgery 7,269 8,861

- Colon/Rectal 360 439
- GI (not provided) ? ?
- Urology (includes Riverside) 5,732 6,987
- Prostate Center (included in Urology?) ? ?
- Dermatology (includes Riverside) 13,251 16,153
- Orthopedics 19,590 23,880
- Rheumatology (included in Medicine) ? ?
- PM&R 2,421 2,951
- Cutaneous Surgery 6,835 8,332
- Musculoskeletal Imaging (included in Imaging) ? ?
Subtotal 55,458 67,603

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 3 – CLINIC VISIT VOLUMES, 2004 AND 2014
Practice Grouping 2004 (F) 2014 (E)

Neurosciences Center
- Audiology ? ?
- ENT 12,126 14,782
- Ophthalmology 27,122 33,062
- Neurology 7,065 8,612
- Neurosurgery 2,527 3,080
- Neurodiagnostics (EEG/EMG) 2,542 3,099
Subtotal 51,382 62,635
Cardiovascular Center
- Cardiovascular 15,073 18,374
- CV & T (included above?) ? ?
- Vascular Surgery ? ?
- Pulmonology (included in Medicine) ? ?
- Vascular/Wound Healing 470 573
- Cardiopulmonary Diagnostics ? ?
- Vascular lab 1,370 1,670
Pulmonary Function Lab 8,801 10,728
Subtotal 25,714 31,345
Women’s Services
- Reproductive Center 14,000 17,066
- Women’s Health Center 8,667 10,565
- Breast Center (Includes Riverside) 10,990 13,382
- U Specialists in Women’ Health 9,705 11,830
Subtotal 43,362 52,843
GRAND TOTAL VISITS 316,511 385,811
VISITS / DAY (252 days/year) 1,255 1,531
ADD: Delaware Street (?) 2,525 3,078
Source: UMPhysicians Administration, November 2004
38
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
8. Estimated Exam/Procedure Room Needs

During this ACC update review, the exam/procedure room need methodol-
ogy developed by KSA/HGA in 2003 was reviewed and deemed useable for
continued use. Visit volume updates were incorporated, and visit times and
hours of operations were reviewed. LarsonAllen included a 70 percent utili-
zation rate; hence, exam rooms would be available 5.6 hours out of an eight
hour day. Previous calculations used 60 percent. Appendix C contains the
detailed calculations for number of exam rooms needed based on moderate
growth.
For estimation purposes only, LarsonAllen suggests numbers of procedure

rooms by clinic type. Exam and procedure room estimates are summarized
in Table 4.

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 4 — ESTIMATED EXAM AND PROCEDURE ROOM NEEDS BY PRACTICE GROUPING

Exam Rooms
Practice Grouping 2014 (E) Proc. Rooms Comments
Primary Care and Medicine
- Family Medicine (Primary Care) 32,752 17.4 2
- Medicine 10,109 5.4 1
- Pediatrics 19,048 15.0 1
- Allergy/Asthma 3,850 2.0 1 Proc. Rm. for testing
- Psychiatry 21,576 16.0 0 Add 2 Group Rooms
- Gateway/Star Clinic (?) 4,510 3.5 0
Subtotal 91,845 59.3 5
Cancer Center
- Oncology (visits) 17,980 12.7 1
- Oncology (infusions) 10,362 9.6 Infusion Bays
- Radiation Therapy ? 5 2 docs concurrently; Add
3 Vaults (?)
- BMT 20,171 18 2
- Transplant Center (includes Solid 31,027 22 2
Organ?)
Subtotal 79,540 67.3 8
Surgery Center and

Musculoskeletal
- Surgery 8,861 4.7 2
- Colon/Rectal 439 .2
- GI (not provided) ?
- Urology (includes Riverside) 6,987 2.4 2 Cysto
- Prostate Center (included in Urology?) ?
- Dermatology (includes Riverside) 16,153 3.8 2 Phototherapy/minor
surgery
- Orthopedics 23,880 12.7 2 2 – 2 position cast rooms
- Rheumatology (in Medicine) ?
- PM&R 2,951 1.6
- Cutaneous Surgery 8,332 4.4 2 Minor surgery
- Musculoskeletal Imaging (included in ? Add 2 imaging units if
Imaging) not near Central Imaging
Subtotal 67,603 29.8 10
40
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 4 — ESTIMATED EXAM AND PROCEDURE ROOM NEEDS BY PRACTICE GROUPING

Exam Rooms
Practice Grouping 2014 (E) Proc. Rooms Comments
Neurosciences Center
- Audiology ? Add 2 audiology booths

- ENT 14,782 7.9 2
- Ophthalmology 33,062 17.6 4 1 minor proc.; 3 misc dx.
rooms
- Neurology 8,612 4.6
- Neurosurgery 3,080 2.2
- Neurodiagnostics (EEG/EMG) 3,099 2 2 flexible dx rooms
Subtotal 62,635 32.3 8
Cardiovascular Center
- Cardiovascular 18,374 9.8

- CV & T (included above?) ?
- Vascular Surgery ?
- Pulmonology (included in Medicine) ?
- Vascular/Wound Healing 573 .3
- Cardiopulmonary Diagnostics ? 4 2 stress test; 1 echo; 1
multifunctional (ECG/
Holter/etc.)
- Vascular lab 1,670 1 Doppler Ultrasound
Pulmonary Function Lab 10,728 5.7 2 Body Box Rooms
Subtotal 31,345 15.8 7
Women’s Services
- Reproductive Center 17,066 8.1 2

- Women’s Health Center 10,565 5.6 1
- Breast Center (Includes Riverside) 13,382 3.0 3 1 breast ultrasound; 2
mammography units
- U Specialists in Women’ Health 11,830 6.3 1
Subtotal 52,843 23.0 7
GRAND TOTAL 385,811 227.5 45

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
9. Typical Module Description

To size the ambulatory care clinic zones (or practice groupings), LarsonAllen
developed a generic module of 12 exam rooms that could house 4-5 concur-
rently practicing providers (see Table 5). Each provider, or physician-student
“pairing,” would have 2.75 – 3.0 exam rooms to use. The key to efficiency is
not permanently assigning providers to exam rooms. Flexibility of use is key,
and the room utilization will greatly improve.
Each module has it’s own reception/registration/check-out, waiting and other

public areas. It is assumed that each practice grouping will be able to create
additional space efficiencies through sharing of these common spaces.
In addition, each module has support space to accommodate providers/nurs-

es involved with clinical research activities. There will also be a designated
centralized clinical research module to serve the clinical research needs of the
providers and patients.
Table 6 in Section 10 summarizes data and space requirements, primarily

based on this module size and components. Certain clinics will need an ad-
justed number of exam or procedure room spaces, and these adjustments will
be reflected in Table 6.
42
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 5 – CLINIC MODULE TEMPLATE

Room Element # NSF Total Comments
NSF
4-5 providers/module
Reception/Registration/Check-out 1 240 4-5 staff each; fax; copy

machine; records; private
check out space
Waiting 1 1,080 16 NSF per person; 2 seats
per exam room (12); 24 seats
· Child Play Area To be added to Peds oriented
clinics
· Patient Education Alcove 1 20
· Phone Alcove 1 6 Needed?
· Water Fountain 1 6
· Public Toilets 1 64 Central to waiting
Assessment Area 2 30 60 At entry to module; privacy

wall
Exam/Treatment Rooms 12 120 1,440 Soundproofed, at least
9” width; door width to
accommodate wheelchairs;
Group Visit Room Use central multipurpose
conference room
Diagnostic Room 1 180 Central; none or more
depending on specialty
Minor Procedure Room 1 180 Central; more depending on
specialty
Staff Work Area 2 100 200 Stand-up or sit-down work
counters; 3-5 staff per area;
fax; copy; storage
· Med Room 1 40 Central to exam rooms;
includes sink; small
refrigerator
Nurse Work Area 2 49 98 (for all providers)

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 5 — CLINIC MODULE TEMPLATE

Room Element # NSF Total NSF Comments
Sample Storage Closet 1 20 With med room
Subwaiting Room 1 120 Also use for clinical research

exam room?
· Consult Room 1 120 Also use for clinical research
exam room?
· Wheelchair Storage 1 12 Two folded wheelchairs
Provider Chart Area 5 60 300 Stand-up or sit-down work

counters; 2 panel x-ray
viewers; near staff work
station
Provider Office Not Needed
Office – Multipurpose 2 120 240 Resident/Student work

areas; Admin. Office?
Clean Supply/Equipment Storage 1 120
Room
Soiled Utility/Trash Room 1 50
Patient Toilet 2 64 128 Central to exam rooms
Specimen Collection Workroom Use Diagnostic Services
Specimen Collection Toilet Use Diagnostic Services
Specimen Collection/ECG Area Use Diagnostic Services
Radiology
Staff Toilet 1 45
Subtotal ASF 43 4,769
DGSF @ 1.5 7,154
44
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
10. Space Requirements

Based on programmatic needs, and preliminary estimates of visit volumes,
concurrently practicing providers, exam room needs, etc., space requirements
have been estimated for the ACC components. Table 6, on the next several
pages, summarizes key space drivers and provides an estimate of Departmen-
tal Gross Square Feet (DGSF) and Building Gross Square Feet (BGSF; using
a 1.25 BGSF to DGSF ratio). For new construction, BGSF is the key data
point to estimate construction costs.

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 6 — ESTIMATED DGSF AND BGSF SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ACC
2014 Exam Proc. #of DGSF / Total Provider/
Practice Grouping/ Visits Rooms Rooms Modules Module DGSF Student Comments
Function “Pairings”2
#1 – Primary Care 91,845 59.3 5 5 7,200 36,000 14 Reduce by 6,000
and Medicine (18 rooms) if
Psychiatry does not
relocate.
#2 – Cancer 79,540 67.3 8 5.5 7,200 39,600 20 “1/2” mod for
Center infusion; does not
include Radiation
Therapy (add
14,000 DGSF)
#3 – Surgery 67,603 29.8 10 3 7,800 23,400 10 Raised to 3
Center and full mods due
Musculoskeletal to number of
procedure rooms
and space needed
for short pre/
post recovery.
Does not include
Ophthalmology
offices or Eye Bank
#4 – 62,635 32.3 8 3 7,200 22,500 11
Neurosciences
Center
#5 – 31,345 15.8 7 2 7,200 14,400 5 Raised to 2 full
Cardiovascular mods due to non-
Center invasive procedure
rooms needed
#6 – Women’s 52,843 23.0 7 2 7,500 15,000 5-6
Services
Other
(proximities to
be determined)
 Retail/Lobby/ 8,000
Information
 GCRC 1 7,200 7,200 4
 STAT Lab 5,000 Serves ACC only.

Expanded program
from Maple Grove
Lab size
46
02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
TABLE 6 — ESTIMATED DGSF AND BGSF SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ACC
2014 Exam Proc. #of DGSF / Total Provider/
Practice Grouping/ Visits Rooms Rooms Modules Module DGSF Student Comments
Function “Pairings”
 Diagnostic Core 22,000 Serves both
(Specimen Collection, adults and
Imaging, other?) peds; Includes
(Need to decide specimen
model (JV, Peds, collection; 2
Adult) CT; 2 MRI; 3
ultrasound;
1 breast
ultrasound; 2
mammography;
3 radiographic;
1 dexa; 2
nuclear (to serve
cardiovascular)
Ambulatory Surgery 25,000 7 operating
rooms for 80% of
adult outpatient
only. If add
80% of pediatric
outpatient,
another 2 rooms
needed. Includes
2 endoscopy
and 1 minor
procedure rooms
PT/OT 2,500 Very limited to
serve outpatients.
Seek more
convenient
service off-site
Dietary 4,000 Not full service;
seating for 125
– 150
 Pharmacy 2,000
 Materials 4,000 docks; 1-2
Management day storage; 3
compactors
 Hotel Services 3,000
 Admin Services 6,000
(admin; HIM; IT; etc.)
 Education Center 6,000
 Delaware Street Not included
Dental Not included
_______
GRAND TOTAL DGSF 245,600
GSF @ 1.25 DGSF 307,000

02 Scenario 7:C
Exhibit 7C
CONCLUSION
This Interim Report suggests that the proposed ACC be sized to accommo-
date 318,000 visits per year by 2014 in 307,000 GSF (before a suggested ten
percent contingency). This GSF estimate differs significantly from the KSA/
HGA estimate of 440,000 GSF. Major areas of difference include:
• No dedicated major research and academic offices beyond what is
included in the clinical research module and within each practice
module (reduction of 21,000 GSF)
• Dental is not included (reduction of 12,000 GSF)
• Does not include consolidated Lab (net reduction of 55,000 GSF)
• Tighter macro programming of Clinics (net reduction of 50,000
GSF)
On architectural challenge relates to the ratio of GSF to DGSF. Site, utility,

and mechanical, and inter-building linkage factors may increase the ratio of
GSF to DGSF from 1.25.
Also, at this stage of planning, we would suggest a ten percent contingency

factor be considered. Therefore, for planning purposes, LarsonAllen recom-
mends that 338,000 GSF be considered for continued planning discussions,
until detailed programming is completed.
To refine estimates and broad operational concepts, as well as gain confidence

in planning assumptions, Department Head review meetings should occur.
This effort will provide some guidance in macro space planning. To further
gain confidence in these estimates, detailed space allocation programming
will need to occur and be guided by balancing customer service expectations
and economic realities.
(Footnotes)
1
Includes cases at Riverside, University, and Sports Medicine surgery locations.
2
Each physician/student pairing uses maximum of three exam rooms.
48
02 SCENARIO 7:D
Stacking Plans
scenario 7 Stacking Plan BUILD.

Existing SERV
/CIRC./ NSF (totals
FUMC UMP LABS AHC ANIMAL COMMON from RS) DGSF
Floor 16 - mech. 2,458 DGSF
Floor 15 5,373 6,979 11,395 23,747 19,746 3,691
Floor 14 16,634 6,886 23,520 19,217 3,691
Floor 13 16,466 7,015 23,481 19,240 3,753
Floor 12 10,395 5,858 16,253 18,440 3,952
Beds Rooms Area Floor 11 11,261 5,180 16,441 11,413 3,631
Floor 10 -
Future Mechanical 17,360 3,982
Future Floor 9 10,382 9,750 9,929 30,061 19,474 8,170
8th Floor - Mechanical/Cafeteria 0 40,954 Floor 8 8,843 9,093 9,863 27,799 19,846 6,302
7th Floor -M-S/GYN/Onc/Neuro/Ortho 106 80 48,237 FUMC UMP AHC TOTAL Floor 7 5,218 11,728 9,595 26,541 18,900 4,704
6th Floor -Cardiology/Transplant 106 80 48,237 5th Floor - Med/Mech 2,180 2,180 Floor 6 5,153 8,259 7,297 20,709 18,273
5th Floor -Neurology/ENT/Peds 106 80 48,237 4th Floor - Surg/Med 11,750 11,750 Floor 5 8,680 1,794 12,551 23,025 18,286
4th Floor -Adult BMT/ICU/Peds BMT 84 75 53,360 3rd Floor - Day Hosp/Peds 8,833 2,826 11,100 Floor 4 7,232 5,273 8,626 21,091 19,070
2nd Floor - Admin/Clinic.

3rd Floor - Surg/Recovery/SSS/Lab, 0 0 76,564 Research 742 10,553 11,920 Floor 3 9,490 10,925 20,415 15,601
2nd Floor - Admit/pharm/ER/ Imaging/

Cath 72,845 1st Floor - Breast/Oncol/Surg 4,234 5,888 2,674 15,540 Floor 2 22,992 171 9,934 29,366 62,463 34,981
1st Floor - Stores/Suppor/PLC/Rad/MRI 88,941 Basement - Rad Therapy./Admin 196 10,424 10,620 Floor 1 30,973 3,837 7,086 23,133 65,029 66,347
Basement - Mech./Elect. 35,453 Group Totals (ASFor DGSF) 13,809 6,084 40,407 63,110 Mezzanine 6,510 11,954 18,464 18,273
BGSF (includes all support

Total Beds Total Rms space) 91452 Basement 13,146 6,403 41,070 60,259 63,690
Area total
(total from
Existing 402 315 Group Totals 103,745 4,008 10,591 137,222 13,489 230,461 RS) DGSF Total Bridge DGSF
479,298 400,797 41,876

Total
Unit J Total DGSF 512,828 Masonic/VFW DGSF 63,110 PWB Total DGSF 442,673

02 SCENARIO 7:D
Stacking Plans
scenario 7 Stacking Plan Departments # of beds Rooms DGSF Area in FGSF
phase one Future

Mechanical Floor 17 - MECH
Future - 16th floor TBD Floor 16
12th Floor - Mechanical 26,500 Floor 12 - Mechanical
Beds Rooms Area (GSF) 11th Floor - Mental Health 37 37 24,000 30,000 Floor 11
Future 0 0 0 10th Floor - Mental Health 40 40 24,000 30,000 Floor 10
Outpatient Behavioral Health (soft space)

Future 0 0 0 9th Floor - plus Offices 46,000 50,000 Floor 9
8th Floor - Mechanical/Cafeteria 40,954 8th Floor - Peds Universal Rooms 48 48 50,000 50,000 Floor 8
7th Floor -M/S/GYN-Onc/Med Onc 106 80 48,237 7th Floor Peds Universal Beds/PICU 48 48 50,000 50,000 Floor 7
6th Floor -Out of Service/Cardiology/Transplant 106 80 48,237 6th Floor - Peds Universal Beds/PICU 12 12 21,000 50,000 Floor 6
NICU 52 52 29,000
5th Floor -M/S (new bed units post move to Children’s Facility) 80 80 48,237 5th Floor - 47 47 50,000 50000
34 PP/15 LDR Floor 5
10 antenatal
3 c-section
33 nursery
4th Floor - ICU/Bone Marrow Trans/Adult BMT 75 75 53,360 4th Floor - Birthing Overflow 12 12 12,000 50,000 49,500 Floor 4

Cardiopulmonary 4,000
Maternal/Fetal Medicine Clinic 3,500
Medical Staff 4,000
Nutrition 10,000
Mechanical 6,000
Ambulatory Surg (includes extension towards

3rd Floor - Surg/Recovery/SSS/Lab, 76,564 3rd Floor- Unit J) 30,000 40,000 37,600 Floor 3-
Pharmacy 2,600
Lobby / Circulation 2,000
Lab (STAT) 3,000
2nd Floor - Admit/pharm/ER/ Imaging/Cath 72,845 2nd Floor - Grade Children’s ED (at Unit J) 6,000 34,000 44,400 Floor 2
(Children’s ED potential site) Public reception/ Lobby 6,000
Admin, Gift Shop, etc 10,000
Education/Conference 8,000
Pediatric Clinic 14,400
1st Floor - Stores/Suppor/PLC/Rad/MRI 88,941 1 st Floor - Lower Lobby 2,000 54,000 49,800 Floor 1
Sedation 900
Imaging 12,500
Home/Health Hospice 600
Ancillary Support: BioMed, CPS
Nutrition, On-call 14,600
Unassigned 20,000
Basement - Mech./Elect. 35,453 Basement level 1 Bio Med / Maint. 5,000 54,000 50,600 Mezzanine
CPS (or use Unit J) 4,000
Housekeeping linen 2,000
Employee Facilities 1,000
Storage/Support 4,000
Mechanical Support 34,000
Total Beds Total Rooms Basement
Total Beds Total Rooms NOTE: 289 Programmed 296 296
Proposed if all “privates” 367 315 Note that arsonAllen is showing 281 Beds
Unit J Total GSF 512,828 Children’s Hospital Total FGSF 568,500 PWB
Dock (Unit J Expansion work) 4,400
Building Gross SF (Total of FGSF) 572,900

02 SCENARIO 7:D
Stacking Plans
Future- Mechanical and

future phases Helipad (Potential) 20,000
Additional Floors as
Required - TBD Floor 17 - MECH
Future - 16 th floor TBD 48 48 30,000 30,000 Floor 16
Floor 12 -
12th Floor - Mechanical 26,500 Mechanical
Future 76 76 0 9th Floor - Outpatient Behavioral Health (soft space) plus Offices 46,000 50,000 Floor 9
NICU 52 52 29,000
5th Floor -M/S (new bed units post move to Children’s Facility) 80 80 48,237 5th Floor - 34 PP/15 LDR 47 47 50,000 50000 Floor 5
10 antenatal
3 c-section
33 nursery
4th Floor - ICU/Bone Marrow Trans/Adult BMT 75 75 53,360 4th Floor - Birthing Overflow 12 12 12,000 50,000 Floor 4
Medical Staff 4,000
Nutrition 10,000
Mechanical 6,000
3rd Floor - Surg/Recovery/SSS/Lab, 76,564 3rd Floor- Ambulatory Surg (includes extension towards Unit J) 30,000 40,000 Floor 3-
Pharmacy 2,600
Lab (STAT) 3,000
2nd Floor - Admit/pharm/ER/ Imaging/Cath 72,845 2nd Floor - Grade Children’s ED (at Unit J) 6,000 34,000 Floor 2
1st Floor - Stores/Suppor/PLC/Rad/MRI 88,941 1 st Floor - Lower Lobby 2,000 54,000 Floor 1
Sedation 900
Imaging 12,500
Unassigned 20,000
Basement - Mech./Elect. 35,453 Basement level 1 Bio Med / Maint. 5,000 54,000 Mezzanine
Proposed if all “privates” 467

Note that LarsonAllen is
showing 281 Beds
Building
Gross SF
(Total of FGSF) 572,900

02 SCENARIO 7:E
Site Plan
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
6/2006 - 6/2008
integrated
waste mgmt
facility Phase I
September 2005

Campus Open Space

P arking
washington ave radisson hotel M.D.H.
parking ramp
B uilding
transportation
& safety bldg

weaver
P ed's Only
V ehic ular
jackson
P ed's &
hall densford
hall Ambulance Traffic
Minor
molecular & moos
health E xis ting
basic
sciences
cellular
biology science
tower
P arking
(804 s talls )
Shuttle Route
&
biomed P ublic /
engin. P atient
P WB
R emodel S taff
boynton health 10/2006-?
service mayo memorial building P arking
territorial hall R eloc ated Automated Kiosk/Wayfinding
existing oak street
underground ramp
parking
child diehl hall One Way T raffic
rehab
varie
ty clu cardio Unit J
b re res cntr
sear
ch c
ntr
& cancer
cntr C linic C linic
frontier hall E xpans ion C linic E xpans ion
pioneer hall A rea A rea P arking
103,700 gs f footprint
- 530 stalls-3 Levels (below)
- 400 stalls-4 levels (above)
C urrent east river road parcel
930 stall (total)
S ervic e A c c es s
T raffic F rom I-94

A mbulanc e E as t & Wes t
V ertic al expans ion on E ntranc e
top of P has e I,

maximize height

NOR T H
0 100 200 300

02 SCENARIO 7:F
ACC Site Options
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
CLINIC
SCHEME 1

02 SCENARIO 7:F
ACC Site Options
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
CLINIC
SCHEME 2

02 SCENARIO 7:F
ACC Site Options
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
CLINIC
SCHEME 3

02 SCENARIO 7:F
ACC Site Options
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
CLINIC
SCHEME 4

02 SCENARIO 7:G
Children’s Hospital Floor Plates
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
LOWER
LEVEL

02 SCENARIO 7:G
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
GRADE
LEVEL--
2ND FLOOR

02 SCENARIO 7:G
Ca
football stadium
Scenario 7
Service Dock
Options
September 2005
nts building
washington ave radisson hotel
parking ramp
3
Parking
transportation
Potential 1 Move River Road
Service -Requires coordination
& safety bldg
Access with City and Park

jackson weaver
Departments
hall densford
hall
molecular & moos 2 Reconfigure Unit 'J' Dock

basic
sciences
cellular
biology
health
science Parking -Limited Scope
& tower
biomed 4
engin.
3 Base of Peds Tower
Potential -No Space for access and
boynton health
pwb oak street
ramp Service vehicle and maneuvering
service mayo memorial building
territorial hall
Parking Access
existing 4 Put in base of ACC -
underground
parking
diehl hall
invest in connections,
child
rehab cost and assistance
varie
ty clu
b re
cardio
res cntr Unit J 5 New Service at Variety Club site
sear
ch c
ntr
& cancer
cntr Clinic Clinic -Future Option
frontier hall Expansion Clinic Expansion
Parking pioneer hall Area (ACC) Area 6 Next Phase - Location TBD
2 RIV
Service ER
RO
east river road parcel
Access AD
5 1
Potential Move Children's Facility
Service River Road
Access
-
-
NORTH
0 100 200 300
Fairview Riverside

02 SCENARIO 7:G
Ca
Scenario 7
Loading Dock
Expansion
September 2005
CRCC
LOADING
DOCK
UNIT 'J'
EXISTING LOADING
DOCK
NEW
DOCKS EXPANDED
STORES
65' MAX.
RIVER R
OAD EA
NORTH
ST
0 100 200 300
MANEUVERING TO NEW DOCKS
NOT ON RIVER ROAD
4,000 S.F.-NEW SPACE

FOR STORES

02 SCENARIO 7:H
Nursing Unit & Patient Room Studies
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
STUDY A
NURSING
UNIT
- (2) UNITS X 24 BEDS
- 44,640 FGSF
- 930 SF / BED

02 SCENARIO 7:H
University
Nursing of Minnesota
Unit & Patient Room Studies
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
STUDY A
SURGICAL
SERVICES

02 SCENARIO 7:H
University
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
STUDY A2
NURSING
UNIT
- (2) UNITS X 24 BEDS
- 51,200 FGSF
- 1,065 SF / BED

02 SCENARIO 7:H
University of& Minnesota
Nursing Unit Patient Room Studies
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
STUDY B
NURSING
UNIT

02 SCENARIO 7:H
University
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
STUDY C
NURSING
UNIT

02 SCENARIO 7:H
Nursing Unit & Patient Room Studies
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
ROOM
LAYOUT
A
- MAXIMIZED CAREGIVER
VIEWS
- INITIAL CONCEPT FOR

NURSING REVIEW
- "OUTBOARD" TOILETS

University7:H
02 SCENARIO of Minnesota
Clinical
Nursing Campus Master
Unit Ca& Patient Plan
Room Studies
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
ROOM
LAYOUT
B1
- 18' X 25' MODULE
- IDENTICAL ROOMS
- MAXIMIZED DAY LIGHTING
- NURSE SUBSTATIONS

02 SCENARIO 7:H
University
Nursing Unit of Minnesota
& Patient Room Studies
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
ROOM
LAYOUT
B2

02 SCENARIO 7:I
Massing and Sun Angle Studies
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
Massing
Study

02 SCENARIO 7:I
Massing and Sun Angle Studies
Scenario 7
Phase I
SEPTEMBER 2005
Massing
and Sun Angle
Study
March 2pm
June 2pm December 2pm

02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Cost Model
Phase One Development—Scenario 7
Masonic/VFW
Children’s Hospital – Stage 1
Location: Masonic/VFW Site
Size: Phase One, Stage 1 & 2, 289 beds, 559,000 BGSF of New & Existing Space
Facility Size: Phase One, Stage 1, 253,500 BGSF
Floor B1-1 @ 50,000 BGSF
Floor 2-4 @ 50,000 BGSF
Land Acquisition 6,125,879

Acquisition -
Skyway Interconnection Costs Program Space in Building Cost
Entitlement Costs 250,000
Utility Capacity 2,882,709
Demolition and Abatement 2,993,170
Relocation of Existing Program -

See Cost for MDH Swing Space -
Construction Cost 82,514,250

Construction Costs 78,585,000
Access Premium 3,929,250
Design Cost 7,858,500

A&E Design 7,858,500
Parking Cost -
No Additional Parking -
Other Project Budgets 42,545,731

FF&E Allowance 10% 7,858,500
Equipment Allowance 25% 19,646,250
IT/Comm/Low Voltage/Moving 11% 8,644,350
Permit Allowance 2% 1,571,700
Project Management Allowance 5% 4,824,931
Subtotal 139,044,360
Project Contingency 5% 6,952,218
Escalation (from 2005) 2.5 years 18,770,989
Total Cost Model 164,800,000

02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Clarifications:
Site assumed to be environmentally “clean”. No extraordinary hazard materials to be removed
No interstitial spaces included. Assumed gross measured areas include mech/elec spaces
No major/special purpose medical equipment included (equipment over $200,000 each)
Based on HGA master planning Scenario 7 included
Based on LarsonAllen Scenario 7-Macro Space Plan, Draft #2, Dated 9/21/05
Escalation included to Construction Contract bid & award date from 2005
No land cost included
No financing costs
No funds have been allocated for move of Masonic Day Hospital to Riverside or Unit J
No funds have been allocated for remodel of Unit J after vacation of Children’s Program
72
02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Ambulatory Care Clinic – Stage 1

Location: Dinniken Block (block #12)
Size: 340,000 BGSF on 8 levels, site size 45,000 GSF

Acquisition -
Skyway Interconnection Costs -
Utility Capacity (split w Childrens) 5,765,417
Demolition and Abate -
Relocation of Existing Program

Land cost -


Parking Cost 25,500,000

Underground Garage 600 stalls 15,900,000
Above Ground Garage 400 stalls 9,600,000

Clarifications:
Site assumed to be environmentally “clean”. No extraordinary haz materials to be removed
Based on HGA planning scenario 7 plan enclosed
Based on LarsonAllen updated UMP program
Cost Escalation estimated to mid-point of project schedule from 2005
No land cost is included
No financing costs
No separate budget has been included for temporary relocation of MVFW clinic to PWB

02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Minnesota Department of Health Building (Swing Space) – Stage 1

Location: 717 Delaware Street SE
Size: 6 Floors containing 125,000 Programmable SF of Space
Land Acquisition 985,000

Acquisition -
Skyway Interconnection Costs None
Entitlement Costs -
Utility Capacity -
Abatement Costs 985,000

None Required -

Interior Build-out-Shell Improv 197,000@ $20 4,925,000
Office to Office 24,000 @ $40 960,000
Lab to Lab 17,000 @ $75 1,275,000
Office to Clinic 20,000 @ $50 1,000,000
Unassigned Space Improv
Design Cost 734,400

A&E Design-Remodel 734,400
Parking Cost -
Repairs under Parking Ops Budgets

FF&E Allowance Reuse Exist
Equipment Allowance Reuse Exist
IT/Comm/Low Voltage/Moving 11% 897,600
Permit Allowance 2% 98,500
Project Management Allowance 5% 493,970
Subtotal 11,369,470
Contingency 5% 568,474
Escalation (from 2005) 596,897
74
02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Clarifications:
Cost Escalation included from 2005 to Construction Contract bid & award date
No improvement budget for Unassigned Space has been included
No parking land cost
No financing costs

02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Cost Model
Phase One Development—Scenario 7 Stage 2

Location: Masonic/VFW Site
Size: Phase One, Stage 1 & 2, 289 beds, 559,000 BGSF of New & Existing Space
Facility Size: Phase One, Stage 1, 253,500 BGSF
Floor 6-11 @ 50,000 BGSF
Land Acquisition -
Acquisition -
Entitlement Costs -
Utility Capacity -
Demolition and Abatement -

See Cost for MDH Swing Space -

Access Premium 5,684,000

Parking Cost -
No Additional Parking -

Escalation (from 2005) 6 years 35,522,950
76
02 Scenario 7:J
Cost Model
Clarifications:
Based on LarsonAllen Scenario 7-Macro Space Plan, Draft #2, Dated 9/21/05
No financing costs

02 Scenario 7:K
Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2
MA M J J A S O N D J FM A M J J A S ON D J FMA M J J A S ON D J F MA M J J A S O N D J FMA M J J A S ON D J FM A M J J A S ON D J FM A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S ON D J FM A M J J A S ON D J FM A M J
1 Ambulatory Care Clinic (ACC) 840 days Mon 7/3/06 Sun 9/20/09
2 2006 Appropriation 0 days Mon 7/3/06 Mon 7/3/06 7/3
3 Site Entitlements 6 mons Mon 7/3/06 Fri 12/15/06
4 Design and Document 9 mons Mon 12/18/06 Fri 8/24/07
5 Permit 3 mons Mon 7/16/07 Fri 10/5/07
6 Bid and Award 3 mons Mon 8/27/07 Fri 11/16/07
7 Construction of ACC 24 mons Mon 11/19/07 Fri 9/18/09
8 Move UMP to ACC 0 days Sun 9/20/09 Sun 9/20/09 9/20
9
10 Move M/VFW & AHC to MDH 437 days Thu 12/1/05 Fri 8/3/07
11 MDH Vacated 0 days Thu 12/1/05 Thu 12/1/05 12/1
12 Purchase MDH Building 2 mons Mon 12/5/05 Fri 1/27/06
13 2006 Appropriateion 0 days Mon 7/3/06 Mon 7/3/06 7/3
14 Design & Document 6 mons Mon 5/15/06 Fri 10/27/06
16 Demo Exist Improv @ MDH 2 mons Mon 10/30/06 Fri 12/22/06
17 Construct AHC MVFW Off Prog 8 mons Mon 12/25/06 Fri 8/3/07
18 Relocate AHC Prog to MDH 0 days Fri 8/3/07 Fri 8/3/07 8/3
19
20 Childrens Hospital-Stage 1 1300 days Mon 1/2/06 Fri 12/24/10
21 Demo M/VFW 3 mons Mon 8/6/07 Fri 10/26/07
25 Bid & Award 5 mons Mon 2/25/08 Fri 7/11/08
26 Construction 32 mons Mon 7/14/08 Fri 12/24/10
27 Move Children's Prog to new CH 0 days Fri 12/24/10 Fri 12/24/10 12/24
28
Project: University of Minnesota/Fairview Clinical Campus Dirstrict-Scenario 7 Task Progress Summary External Tasks Deadline
Date: September 22, 2005
Split Milestone Project Summary External Milestone
Page 1

03 Scenario 8:A
03 SCENARIO 8
SCENARIO DESCRITIONS AND PROGRAM

ASSUMPTIONS
General Description
SCENARIO 8 considers the revitalization of the Clinical Sciences Campus

by implementing the following elements:
• Development of a replacement Children’s Hospital, on a staged schedule, on
the Riverside Campus. (See Attached Staging Plan).
• Consolidation of the Adult’s, Women’s and Children’s hospital programs on
the Riverside Campus, based on a staged implementation.
• No program swing space is needed in this study.
Program Assumptions
Children’s Hospital:
• Proposed Site Location: Riverside Campus
80,000 GSF (1.72 acres)
• Facility Profile: (Phase 1 Stage 1 & 2 completed)
– 289 Beds
OB 59 Beds
Med/Surg 101 Beds
NICU 52 Beds
• Total Children’s Hospital Size
559,000 BGSF (New and Existing)
• Parking Requirements: Stage 1 need 600 spaces
Source: LarsonAllen Children’s Macro Space Program: Draft #3 Dated: 9/21/05
ISSUES
• Single site consolidation for the clinical enterprise will not be
accomplished under this Scenario.
• In initial stages, Children’s programs will be consolidated and
expanded at Riverside, followed by the Women’s programs and
ultimately the Adult programs.

03 Scenario 8:A

and competitiveness. (Staging plan detail attached Exhibit 8B).
• Schedule: Phase 1 Stage1 completed in 2010, Phase1, Stage 2 in
2013.
• No funds have been allocated for the following:
– Pediatric faculty office consolidation on Riverside
– Existing Riverside program areas assumed to be used “as is” based
on the LarsonAllen Macro Space Program.
Ambulatory Care Clinic Macro Program

Exclusions
· Dental clinic
· Inpatient GCRC
Minnesota Department of Health Building (MDH):

(Swing Space)
Under this Scenario, no MDH swing space is required.
82
03 Scenario 8:A
Scenario 8 Status Report

Siting Workgroup
Access: (See attached site plan)
• Regional roadway system sufficient to handle current and future volumes for
the Clinic and Hospital.
• Huron Ave and Washington Ave account for 85% of current Clinic & Unit
J Hospital patient visits
Huron 45%
Washington 40%
• Riverside Ave and Cedar Ave are sufficient to handle the existing Riverside
Campus and projected Children’s Hospital volumes.
• Central Corridor LRT alignment on Washington Avenue will restrict vehicle
access on Washington Ave. It is anticipated University and Huron Aves. will
absorb the Washington volumes without significant service impact.
• Huron Ave/Fulton Street will be signature entrance for Clinic patients and
visitors.
• Riverside Ave will be the signature entrance for the Children’s Hospital
patients and visitors.
• Clinic visits (1,500 per day by 2014) will terminate at the Ambulatory
Care Clinic on the Dinnaken block in new parking capacity constructed
on that site. This will reduce patient vehicle/student pedestrian interface
significantly from previous scenarios.
• Children’s Hospital visits will not affect the University East Bank Campus.
Based upon the location of the proposed Children’s Hospital near Riverside
Ave., there is no significant vehicle/pedestrian interface or impact at the
Riverside Campus.
Parking: (See attached site plan)

• Relocation of the Ambulatory Care Clinic to the Dinnaken block is
expected to free up approximately 500 patient visitor parking spaces in the
Fairview PV Ramp
• Build 600 stall in conjunction with Children’s Hospital at Riverside.
Anticipated need for the new Children’s Hospital Stage 1 is approximately
560 spaces. Stage 2 Children’s program currently parks in Riverside existing
capacity
• Fairview currently has 1,268 contract spaces in the Oak Street Ramp for
staff of the Unit J and the Clinic. Anticipate continuing to occupy those
spaces with clinic staff.
• Based upon 2014 Clinic volumes of 363,000 patient visits annually, 600
parking spaces for patients and visitors is anticipated to be needed at the
new Clinic location.
• It is anticipated to add 600 new parking stalls on 3 full block subterranean
levels under the Clinic.
• It is anticipated the 130-150 Fairview staff currently could be relocated to

03 Scenario 8:A
parking availability in the Fairview PV Ramp. Additionally staff parking

could be shifted from the Oak Street Garage to the availability in the PV
Garage.
• Approximately 350-370 spaces would be available in the Oak Street Garage
to reduce the Fairview contract requirement or reduce the Clinic parking
need.
Wayfinding: (See attached site plan)
• It is anticipated to establish a unique Clinical District branding identity and
coordinated directional signage system to direct all Clinic patients/visitors
to the Huron/Fulton intersection for vehicle entry into the Clinical District
regardless of the direction of approach.
• It is anticipated to design and install an intelligent traffic management
system to assist patient/visitor in finding their destination and available
parking.
• The wayfinding/branding system will likewise have a pedestrian component
to direct patient/visitors arriving by other modes of transportation to the
desired district destination.
Loading Dock:
• Due it physical distance, utility impediments and the capacity limitation it is
expected to construct a loading dock, most likely subterranean, for the ACC
Clinic at its new location.
People and Material Movement Between Facilities (See
attached comparative analysis)
• Given physical distances between facilities and characteristics/uses of the
areas between the facilities, automated systems for people moving will be
expensive to install and operate.
• Reliability of service could likewise be a significant challenge.
• Street based shuttles from clinic to hospital may still prove to be the most
efficient, reliable and cost effective means of movement. More detailed
study is required to finalize this issue.
Operational Integration between the Clinic and Hospital
sites
• This will depend on the program determinations of the Clinic and Hospital
working groups which are not yet finalized.
Infrastructure and Utilities.
• Based on discussion with University Services, utility services are readily
available in the area for the Clinic with the exception of steam service and
electric service.
• Generating capacity for steam is currently available in sufficient capacity
at the University Steam Plant. Distribution infrastructure costs have been
included in preliminary budgeting.
• Systems upgrades to the capacity of the electrical grid in the Clinical District
have also bee included in the preliminary budgeting.
84
03 Scenario 8:A
Site Capacity (See attached Stacking Plans)

• Significant site capacity for Phase I projects and future growth of the Clinic
Campus exists on the ACC site and adjoining property.
Future Development Potential
• Significant site capacity to accommodate future clinical development at both
the proposed ACC Clinic site and the Riverside Children’s Hospital site is
available.
Relocation/Swing Space Needs
• Little or non is anticipated to be needed.

03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A
Children’s Hospital Macro Program

versity of Minnesota Children’s Hospital at Riverside:
1. The proposed facility will be located on the Riverside Campus, linked

to existing structures.
2. Initially, adult med/surg/ortho/behavioral services would remain on the
Riverside Campus, although not intermixed with inpatient, surgical,
imaging, and rehabilitation services. Longer term decisions regarding
adult service locations are not compromised by this Scenario.
3. Overtime, the Riverside Campus could be totally regenerated to provide
for. at least, a free-standing Children’s Hospital, and potentially, a
combination of medical and/.or research facilities for UMMC.
Service Beds
OB 592
(3 triage; 10 antepartum; 15 LDR’s; 31 Post Partum)
NICU 52
Adolescent MH 38

TOTAL 289
site. Two modules of 15 exam rooms each will be provided (capacity
of 74,000 visits per year (two visits per room per hour, 7 hours per day.
252 days per year, at 70 percent utilization)
Hospital site.
Hospital site.
8. Pediatric surgery will occur in dedicated operating rooms
within Children’s. Ten operating rooms will be provided.

At 2,600 births, with a 30 percent c-section rate, 30 post partum beds would be
needed at a 65 percent occupancy level. This considers a 2.2 day ALOS for normal
vaginal births; 4.0 day ALOS for c-section births. At 2,600 births, up to 10 – 12
LDR’s (including one ICU) would be needed, assuming appropriate use of triage beds
(not LDR’s) for ruling in/out labor. LarsonAllen does not have data to determine if 10
antepartum rooms are needed.
86
03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A
10. All rooms will be private, including PICU, NICU and Behavioral.
THE “STRAW DOG”

cilities replaced in new construction. It is completed in two stages. Some
behavioral service outpatient programs may remain in Riverside East; faculty
and related medical staff offices are situated in Riverside East; Pediatric out-
patient rehabilitation is relocated to Riverside East, Floor 1; some administra-
tive and facility support services remain in Riverside East.
At the end of Phase 1, the North Building could be razed.
Phase 2 consists of replacing all Riverside adult, and adult behavioral inpa-
tient and outpatient facilities in new construction. This includes all diagnos-
tic and therapeutic services, as well as the adolescent outpatient behavioral
services remaining in Riverside East. Some/most facility support services
would remain in the Riverside East building.
At the end of Phase 2, the West buildings could be razed.
To accomplish Phase 2, the Medical Office Building and the Red Ramp would
need to be razed. With respect to the Medical Office Building, the building
reportedly reverts back to Fairview ownership in 2014. The Red Ramp has a
life expectancy of four to six years.
Phase 3 allows for a variety of choices for programs and services to be situated
in new construction on the razed West Building site.
At the end of Phase 3, the Riverside East buildings could be razed, allowing
for future flexibility of use.

• Adult services remain on Campus. This includes general medical/surgical
inpatient and outpatient services, the Orthopedic Department and Clinics,
the Sports Medicine Surgery Center, and all behavioral services. In addition,
other post-acute care functions in the 2512 Building remain. As stated

03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A
above, adult and pediatric services are not intermixed among inpatient,
surgical, imaging, and rehabilitation services.
• BMT/SOT and related radiation therapy services remain in Unit J in Stage
1, and relocated in Stage 2.
• In Stage 1, NICU and OB will remain in their existing facilities, with
opportunity provided for future NICU expansion in existing facilities.
facilities, with some (undefined) level of refurbishment.
• With adult services remaining at Riverside, adult surgery cases require
almost all current surgical capacity. Hence, a pediatric inpatient and
outpatient surgery department will be situated in new construction. Ten
operating rooms and related support spaces will be provided for pediatrics.
This will “free-up” four to six operating rooms in Unit J, allowing for growth
and backfill, and/or renovation to create more appropriately sized operating
rooms and support spaces.
• With adult services remaining at Riverside, adult imaging services will
continue to be provided, although adult outpatient imaging may be
provided elsewhere (possible joint venture). The existing Riverside Imaging
Department is/will be underutilized allowing for opportunity to combine
pediatric and adult imaging services. However, there is a strong operational
and programmatic desire not to mix these patient types and, it will be
very challenging to physically connect the new Children’s facilities to the
existing imaging department. Therefore, a Pediatric Imaging Department
will be situated in new construction. It will be part of a Diagnostic
Service Core which includes imaging, cardiology, specimen collection, and
neurodiagnostic services. Imaging equipment currently within the Unit J
Imaging department will be relocated to Riverside.
• A new Pediatric Emergency Department will be developed in new
construction. Operational, programmatic, and physical linkage issues
need to be discussed around emergency adolescent behavioral services and
transport to West and North Buildings.
• There will be an underground parking structure directly beneath the
Pediatric Hospital. 400 – 560 spaces are needed to support incremental
volume to the Campus, and also includes replacement of 200+/- existing
spaces in the Green Lot and metered spaces. The ability to provide this
amount of parking (and/or additional stalls) is dependent on bedrock depth
(reportedly at 30 to 40 feet) and capital availability. It should be noted that
if additional parking is provided beyond the 560 stalls, this can alleviate
future parking needs when the Red Ramp is to be razed due to age or it’s
location needed for Phase 2 development.
• Pediatric faculty offices will be situated in existing Riverside areas, if
available.
Phase 1, Stages 1 and 2, are depicted in visuals provided by Perkins & Wills.
88
03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A


Administration 6 people 1,500 COO; Financial; Physician Leader; New – 2 New – 2 1,500
Admitting/Registration/Financial 4 staff; 1 coordinator 1,500 5 offices; workroom; waiting New – 1 New – 1 1,500
Counseling
Birth and Family Education 6 staff and 1,500 Existing New – 8 1,500
classroom
Business Office 2 staff 300 2 Workstations New – 1 New – 1 300
Child/Life 8 staff (?) 1,600 Could be decentralized on nursing New – 1 New –1 1,600
units
Communications/Marketing 3 staff 600 New – 2 New – 2 600
Family Resource Center 1-2 staff 1,000 Library; kiosks; storage New – 1 New – 1 1,000
Foundation 2 staff 600 2 offices; waiting; workroom New – 2 New – 2 600
Information Services 6 persons 2,500 5 workstations; 1 office; small New – 2 New – 2 2,500
computer room; storage; burn-in
area; 3 data closets
Health Information Services/ 8 staff 1,600 7 workstations; 1 office; minimal New – 2 New – 2 1,600
Q.M/ Risk Management. files; ROI; EPIC (digital/paperless)
Human Resources 4 staff and files 800 Existing Existing
Medical Staff Facilities 800 Physician lounge; records Existing Existing
completion; toilet
Meditation Room 600 New – 2 New – 2 600
Patient Care Administration 8 staff 2,000 3 Supervisors; 1 care manager; 2 New – 2 New – 2 2,000
Volunteers/Gift Shop 1,000 In public lobby; gift shop; In separate New – 1 New – 1 1,000 ____
Subtotal 18,900 14,800 1,500

03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A

TREATMENT SERVICES
Behavioral Faculty Offices 30 staff 6,000 Guesstimate Existing East 6,000a

Building
Cardiopulmonary Services 3,000 No interventional; includes New – 1 New – 1 3,000
respiratory therapy, Blood Gas; non-
invasive cardiology (4 procedure
rooms)
Emergency Services 10,000 visits 6,000 Majority are behavioral visits; 5 New – 1 New –1 6,000
(underestimated?) exam/consult rooms; 3 exam/
treatment rooms; 1 major exam/
treatment room; waiting; 1 negative
air room
Home Health 3-4 staff 600 Existing New – 8 600
Integrative Medicine 2 staff 600 New – 1 New – 1 600
Laboratory 8 staff on day shift 3,000 Existing Existing
- NICU Stat Lab 300 Existing New – 9 300
- PICU Stat Lab 300 New – 4 New – 4 300
- Surgery Stat Lab 300 New – 2 New – 2 300
- Outpatient Spec. Collect. 1,000 New – 1 New – 1 1,000
Lactation Area 3 Lactation rooms 800 Near OB/Nursery Existing New – 8 800
1 office
Maternal/Fetal Medicine Clinic 6 exam rooms; 4 4,000 New – 1 New – 1 4,000
Medical Imaging 1 CT; 1 MRI 12,600 Major interventional in Unit J. New – 1 New – 1 12,600
1 R&F Unit Sedation area included.
1 Rad Unit
2 Ultrasound
1 Nuclear
1 Interventional
Room

TREATMENT SERVICES
Neurodiagnostics 3 procedure rooms 1,200 New – 1 New - 1 1,200
Outpatient Behavioral Health 40,000 All outpatient programs and offices Existing Existing
Pediatric Clinic and “Gold Key” 19,000+ primary 18,000 Two modules of 15 exam rooms each New – 1 New –1 18,000
Pediatric Outreach 2-3 positions 600 New – 1 New – 1 600
Pharmacy 6 staff on day shift 2,600 Use Pyxis throughout hospital; IV Existing Existing
add room; 1 pick station; solution
storage; office; Satellites on units
Radiation Therapy 1 Linac plus support 5,700 Provide with BMT Services N/A WBRTC 5,700a
Rehab Services 5,000 PT/OT/Speech/Audiology; inpatient Riverside Riverside 5,000a
only –1 -- 1
Surgery/Recovery/Ambulatory 4,400 – 6,000 30,000 New – 2 New - 2 30,000
operating rooms;
2 minor procedure
rooms
_________ ______ ______
Subtotal 141,300 77,600 1,700
5,000a 11,700a
90
03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A

PATIENT CARE UNITS
Med/Surg/PICU Units Universal Rooms @ 1,000 DGSF/bed; very high by

today’s standards
- Med/Surg 56 56,000 New – 3 / New – 3 56,000
- PICU 24 24,000 New – 4 / New 24,000
- BMT 21 21,000 New -4 –4 21,000b 21,000c
Shelled New --4
Birthing/Perinatal Services 34 PP/15 LDR/10 59,000 1,000 DGSF/bed; Above or below Existing New -- 8 59,000
antenatal/ 3 c- Surgery /9
section/ 33 nursery
Mental Health/CD 77 Beds 46,200 @ 600 DGSF/bed; all private rooms; Existing New – 6 46,200
group rooms; dining; activity; school /7
NICU 52 Beds 28,600 @ 550 DGSF/bed Existing New – 9 28,600
_________ ______ ______
Subtotal 289 beds 234,800 80,000 133,800
21,000b 21,000c
Space Estimated PHASE 1 LOCATION PHASE 1 S.F.

Department/Function Drivers DGSF Comments/Modalities (by floor) (DGSF)
SERVICES
Biomedical Engineering 4 technician 2,000 Work area; equipment cueing; parts Existing Existing
storage
Central Processing Services 4,000 CPC off-site; case cart prep; main Existing Existing
Employee Facilities 1,000 Male/Female locker rooms; toilets/ Existing? Existing?
showers
Existing Existing
Maintenance/Plant Operations 4.5 staff/day 4,000 Parts; shops; office; plan room; paint Existing Existing
selected functions
Materials Management 4,000 Break-out area; staging area; Dirty Existing Existing
Nutrition Services 13,000 Limited; kitchen; servery; dining for Existing? Existing?
150
On-Call Rooms 10 rooms 2,000 Private room; shared toilets/showers Use East Use East
Public Reception/Lobby 3,000 Lobby; toilet; resting areas New – 1 New – 1 3,000
Storage – General 2,000 Existing Existing
_________ ______ _____
Subtotal 37,500 5,500

03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8A

EDUCATION
Auditorium 200 seats; theatre 8,000 New – 2 New – 2 8,000

style
Conference/Classrooms 3,000 Mix of large and small rooms; New – 2 New – 2 3,000
conferencing
Library/Media Center 1,500 New – 2 New – 2 1,500
Medical Education Offices 1,000 New – 2 New – 2 1,000
Medical Student Work Areas 1,000 New – 2 New – 2 1,000
________ ______ ______
Subtotal 14,500 14,500 0
TOTAL NEW DGSF 447,000 192,400 137,000
a: TOTAL REMODEL DGSF 5,000 11,700
b: TOTAL SHELLED-IN DGSF 21,000
c: TOTAL FIT-OUT DGSF 21,000
b: SHELLED-IN BGSF @ 1.25 26,300
DGSF
TOTAL BGSF 266,800 171,300
ADD: Faculty Support Space 70 faculty plus 1.5 35,000 Riverside 35,000a
support per staff = East
175 staff -12th?
-B Bldg?
92
03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8B
Children’s Hospital Staging Plan (exhibit 8b)
Phase 1 Children’s Hospital on Riverside New Const Shell-out Remodel

Stage 1-New Construction DGSF DGSF DGSF
Med/Surg Beds (80 beds) 80,000
BMT (21 beds-shelled only) 21,000
OR’s (10 each) 30,000
Imaging 12,600
Cardio 3,000
ER 6,000
Labs/STAT 1,600
Maternal/Fetal Med Clinic 4,000
Education 14,500
Skwy/Corrid. Conn (1,2,3,BH) 3,500
SubTotal Phase 1 Stage 1 195,900 21,000

Total Stage 1 BGSF 244,875 26,250
Stage 1-Parking
3 levels-subterranean
80,000 gsf @ 400 sf/space 600 spaces
Rehab Services @ Riverside 5,000

Subtotal Remodeled Space 5,000
Assumptions:
BMT stays at Unit J

03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8B
Stage 2-Expansion to Stage 1

vertical and D/T horizontal DGSF DGSF DGSF
BMT ( 21 beds-finishes only) 21,000

NICU (52 beds) 28,600
OB (59 beds) 59,000
Home Health 600
NICU Stat Lab 300
Lactation Area 800
Subtotal Phase 1 Stage 2 137,000 21,000

Total Stage 2 BGSF 171,250 26,250

Radiation Therapy 5,700
Subtotal Remodeled Space 11,700
Assumptions:
Provides a Materially Stand-Alone Children’s & Women’s Hospital
Decant adults to Riv-East to extent feasible
Demo Riverside North
94
03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8B
Phase 2
Build First Stage UMMC’s Adult, Children’s & Women’s
Program Single Site Consolidation on Riverside Campus
Re-generate Riverside Adult Program on Red Ramp Site

Use excess cap. in Children’s Hospital Parking
Shuttle staff from UMMC East Bank PV Ramp Capacity
Demo Red Ramp
Adult Med/Surg & Adult Mental Health Hospital
Decant Riverside West
Demo Riverside West
Phase 3
Complete UMMC’s Adult, Children’s & Womens’s Program
Single Site
Consolidation on Riverside Campus

Complete Re-generation of Riverside Adult Program on Riverside West Site
Construct New Adult Program Hospital
Decant Riverside East to New Hospital
Decant Unit J all East Bank Campus Adult Program to New Hospital
Demo Riverside West Building
Deposition of Unit J
Depostion of UMMC East Bank PV Parking Ramp

03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8B
CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL
Staging Plan DRAFT-For Discussion Only
Description Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Scenario 9

Phase 1 Stage 1 Build First Stage of Children’s
Hospital Program
Children’s Hospital-New Construct Per Prog Sum Per Prog Sum Per Prog Sum
Ancillary Service Support Unit J Riverside-East New Construct
Existing Building Remodel
Constructabilty Premium Eff Loss 5% N/A $- N/A $-
Design 10% of Const 10% of Const 10% of Const
Parking Extg FV Ramp $- Subterranean Subterranean

Capacity XXX stalls XXX stalls
Land Cost M/VFW Site $- Green Lot Site $- Block 11 $13,700,000

Program Relocation Masonic/VFW $12,500,000 N/A incl above N/A
Utilities U of M Excel/MEC U of M
Capacity & Distribution Steam/Elect $5,800,000 City of Mpls Steam/Elect $3,000,000
Project Cost Multiplier 60% of Construct 60% of Construct 60% of Construct

Total Phase 1 Stage 1 Budget*
Phase 1 Stage 2 Complete the Consolidation of

Children’s and Women’s Hospital Program
Children’s Hospital-New Construct Per Prog Sum Per Prog Sum Per Prog Sum
Ancillary Service Support Unit J Riverside-East New Construct
Constructabilty Premium Eff Loss 8% Effic Loss 4% Effic Loss 4%

Site & Extg Ops Extg Ops Extg Ops
Design 10% of Construct 10% of Construct 10% of Construct
Parking Extg FV Ramp Subterranean Subterranean

Capacity
Land Cost Extg Site $- Extg Site $- Extg Site $-

Program Relocation
Utilities Extg Capacity $- Extg Capacity $- Extg Capacity $-

Capacity & Distribution
Project Cost Multiplier 60% of Construct 60% of Construct 60% of Construct

Total Phase 1 Stage 2 Costs*
* No Escalation is included (2005 dollars)
96
03 Scenario 8:B
Exhibit 8B
Phase 2, Stage 1
Build First Stage UMMC’s Adult, Children’s & Women’s
Program Single Site Consolidation on Riverside Campus
Re-generate Riverside Adult Program on Red Ramp Site
Use excess cap. in CH parking

Shuttle staff from UMMC East Bank Ramp Capacity
Demo Red Ramp
Adult Med/Surg & Adult MH Hospital

Decant Riverside West
Demo Riverside West and North
Phase 2, Stage 2
Complete UMMC’s Adult, Children’s & Womens’s Program
Single Site Consolidation on Riverside Campus
Complete Re-generation of Riverside Adult Program on Riverside West Site
Construct New Adult Program Hospital

Decant Riverside East to New Hospital
Decant Unit J Adult Program to New Hospital\
Demo Riverside West Building
Deposition of Unit J

03 Scenario 8:C
Exhibit 8C
Ambulatory Care Clinic INTERIM REPORT

See Scenario 7, Exhibit 7C

03 Scenario 8:D
Stacking Plans
phase one, Proposed Future

Mechanical Floor 17 - MECH
12th Floor - Mechanical 26,500 Floor 12 - Mechanical
Outpatient Behavioral Health (soft space)

Future 0 0 0 9th Floor - plus Offices 46,000 50,000 Floor 9
NICU 52 52 29,000
5th Floor -M/S (new bed units post move to Children’s Facility) 80 80 48,237 5th Floor - 47 47 50,000 50000
34 PP/15 LDR Floor 5
10 antenatal
3 c-section
33 nursery
4th Floor - ICU/Bone Marrow Trans/Adult BMT 75 75 53,360 4th Floor - Birthing Overflow 12 12 12,000 50,000 49,500 Floor 4

Medical Staff 4,000
Nutrition 10,000
Mechanical 6,000
Ambulatory Surg (includes extension towards

3rd Floor - Surg/Recovery/SSS/Lab, 76,564 3rd Floor- Unit J) 30,000 40,000 37,600 Floor 3-
Pharmacy 2,600
Lab (STAT) 3,000
2nd Floor - Admit/pharm/ER/ Imaging/Cath 72,845 2nd Floor - Grade Children’s ED (at Unit J) 6,000 34,000 44,400 Floor 2
1st Floor - Stores/Suppor/PLC/Rad/MRI 88,941 1 st Floor - Lower Lobby 2,000 54,000 49,800 Floor 1
Sedation 900
Imaging 12,500
Unassigned 20,000
Basement - Mech./Elect. 35,453 Basement level 1 Bio Med / Maint. 5,000 54,000 50,600 Mezzanine
Proposed if all “privates” 367 315 Note that arsonAllen is showing 281 Beds
Building Gross SF (Total of FGSF) 572,900

03 Scenario 8:E
Site Plans
Scenario 8
Option A
Yellow (West)
Parking Ramp TEST FIT STUDY
(945 Spaces)
E Fairview Corp. SEPTEMBER 2005
North
525 23rd Ave. S. 2344 24th Ave. S.
P S
A Future Expansion Existing

B Boiler Plant
Health Partners 2406 Riverside Ave.
2220 6th St. S.
Riverside West Surface Parking Parking
(20 Spaces)
C 2312 6th St. S
Proposed
E St. Mary’s Campus College Children’s
E of St. Catherine
E 601 25th Ave. S.
Smiley’s Point E AC S
2211 Riverside Ave. E Visitor Vehicles
P E
E Surface
Parking Service Vehicles
Riverside
Professional (15 Spaces)
Underground
Building E Parking
606 24th Riverside East ‘A’
Parking 2414 7th St. S.
(228 Spaces) Building Entrance E
Ave S.
P Parking Entrance P
Riverside Rehabilitation
Center
Service Entrance S
E 2412 7th Ave. S.
E
E P P
Underground
Parking
0 100 200 300

03 Scenario 8:F
ACC Site Options
Ambulatory Care Clinic Site options

See Scenario 7:f Schemes 1 – 4

03 Scenario 8:G
Floor Plate Options
Below Grade

03 Scenario 8:G
Floor Plate Options
entry level

03 Scenario 8:G
Floor Plate Options
second floor

03 Scenario 8:G
Floor Plate Options
bed floors

03 Scenario 8:H
Cost Model
Cost Model
Phase One Development — Scenario 8
Children’s at Riverside/ACC at Dinnaken Stage1
Children’s Hospital – Stage1

Location: Riverside Campus
Size: Phase One, Stages 1 & 2, 289 beds, 559,000 BGSF
Facility Size: 271,175 BGSF New Construction-(80 beds w/required ancillaries)
New Construction 244,875 BGSF
New Construction Shelled Out 26,250 BGSF
Remodel of Existing Buildings: 5,000 BGSF
Floorplate:

Acquisition -
Skyway Interconnection Costs Included in Construction Costs

See costs for parking swing costs -

Construction Costs -New 244,875 BGSF 75,911,250
New-Shell Only 26,250 BGSF 2,887,500
Remodel-Existing 5,000 BGSF 375,000


Under Building Parking 600 15,600,000
80,000 GSF site X 3 levels @
400 sf/space

03 Scenario 8:H
Cost Model

Clarifications:
Based on P&W master planning Scenario 8 included
Based on LarsonAllen Macro Space Program Draft #3.1 for UMMC @ Riverside Dated 9/21/05
No financing costs
Ambulatory Care Clinic


Acquisition -

Land cost -


110
03 Scenario 8:H
Cost Model

Parking Garage 400 stalls 9,600,000

Contingency 5% 9,111,014
Clarifications:
Based on HGA planning Scenario 8 plan enclosed
Cost Escalation estimated to Construction Contract bid & award date from 2005
No land cost
No financing costs
Minnesota Department of Health Building

(Swing Space) NOT NEEDED
Land Acquisition -
Acquisition -
Entitlement Costs -
Utility Capacity -
Abatement Costs -

None Required -

03 Scenario 8:H
Cost Model
Construction Cost -
Interior Build-out-Shell Improv 197,000@ $20
Office to Office 24,000 @ $40
Lab to Lab 17,000 @ $75
Office to Clinic 20,000 @ $50
Design Cost -
A&E Design-Remodel -
Parking Cost -
Other Project Budgets -

IT/Comm/Low Voltage/Moving 11% -
Permit Allowance 2% -
Project Management Allowance 5% -
Subtotal -
Contingency 5% -
Escalation (from 2005) -
Total Cost Model -
112
03 Scenario 8:H
Cost Model
Children’s at Riverside/ACC at Dinnaken – Stage 2

Location: Riverside Campus
Size: 289 beds, 559,000 BGSF, 1,934 BGSF/Bed
Stage 2 Facility Size: 171,250 BGSF New Construction
New Construction 171,250 BGSF
New Construction Finish of Shell Space 26,250 BGSF
Remodel of Existing Buildings: 11,700 BGSF
Floorplate:
Land Acquisition -
Acquisition -
Skyway Interconnection Costs Included in Construction Costs
Entitlement Costs
Utility Capacity -

-
Construction Costs -New 171,250 BGSF 49,662,500
New-Finish Only 26,250 BGSF 5,250,000
Remodel-Existing 11,700 BGSF 877,500

Parking Cost -
Under Building Parking -

Permit Allowance 2% 993,250

03 Scenario 8:H
Cost Model
Subtotal 87,999,668
Escalation (from 2005) 6 years 24,375,908
Clarifications:
Based on P&W master planning Scenario 8 included
Based on LarsonAllen Macro Space Program Draft #3 for UMMC @ Riverside Dated 921/05
No financing costs
114
03 Scenario 8:I
Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J
1 Ambulatory Care Clinic (ACC) 840 days Mon 7/3/06 Sun 9/20/09
8 Move UMP to ACC 0 days Sun 9/20/09 Sun 9/20/09 9/20
9
17
18 Children's Hospital-Stage 2 800 days Mon 5/17/10 Fri 6/7/13
23 Move All Child/Women Program 0 days Fri 6/7/13 Fri 6/7/13 6/7
Page 1

04 Scenario 9:A
04 SCENARIO 9
SCENARIO DESCRITIONS AND PROGRAM

ASSUMPTIONS
General Description
SCENARIO 9 considers the Phase I revitalization of the Clinical Sciences
Campus by implementing the following elements:
• Development of a replacement Children’s Hospital on the adjacent block to
the ACC Clinic west of Dinnaken.
Assumptions
Children’s Hospital:
• Proposed Site Location: Adjacent Block west of Dinnaken 90,000
GSF (2.1+/- acres)
– 289 Beds
OB 59 Beds
Med/Surg 101 Beds
NICU 52 Beds
• Total Children’s Hospital Size 519,500 BGSF
• Parking Requirements: TBD
Source: LarsonAllen Children’s Macro Space Program: Draft #3.1 Dated: 8/11/05
ISSUES:
• Children’s program/service/support functions greater than anticipated
in McKensey study and LarsonAllen translation to space needs.
• Stand Alone Hospital- Minimal Sharing of Services with Unit J or
Riverside
– Operating Room Quantities and Configurations
Will be based on new surgical volume estimates
May increase pediatric OR’s to 10+ Operating Rooms
Creates OR capacity issues between Children’s and Unit J
– Nursing Floor Configurations
New site provide maximum flexibility for Nursing Floor Config
· Patient room size

04 Scenario 9:A
· Ability to achieve 2 units of 24 rooms on each floor

· Patient room configuration and window configuration
· Nursing unit design and flow
– Imaging
Anticipates pediatric imaging will be within Children’s
Hospital
– Patient Flow
Physical separation from Unit J and Riverside will drive most
all pediatric D/T services to Children’s Hospital.
• Phase II single site consolidation for the clinical enterprise is under
further study to determine, from a Clinical Campus Partners
perspective, a mutually acceptable road map and sequencing plan for
consolidation.
and competitiveness. (Staging plan detail attached Exhibit 9B).
Ambulatory Care Clinic:

Exclusions
· Dental clinic
· Inpatient GCRC
Minnesota Department of Health Building (MDH):

(Swing Space):
Swing Space not needed
118
04 Scenario 9:A
Scenario 9 Status Report

Siting Workgroup:
Access: (See attached site plan)
• Regional roadway system sufficient to handle current and future volumes
• Huron Ave and Washington Ave account for 85% of current patient visits
Huron 45%
Washington 40%
• Central Corridor LRT alignment on Washington Avenue will restrict vehicle
access on Washington Ave. It is anticipated University and Huron Aves. will
absorb the Washington volumes without significant service impact.
• Huron Ave/Fulton Street will be signature entrance for both Clinic and
Hospital patients and visitors.
• Clinic visits (1,500 per day by 2014) will terminate at the Ambulatory
Care Clinic on the Dinnaken block in new parking capacity constructed
on that site. This will reduce patient vehicle/student pedestrian interface
significantly from previous scenarios.
• Hospital (Children’s & Unit J) access will continue via streets surrounding
the Housing Superblock.
Parking: (See attached site plan)

• Relocation of the Ambulatory Care Clinic to the Dinnaken block is
expected to free up approximately 500 patient visitor parking spaces in the
Fairview Ramp and immediate vicinity. This capacity would be available for
the Children’s Hospital patients and visitors.
• Fairview currently has 1,268 contract spaces in the Oak Street Ramp for
staff of the Unit J and the Clinic. Anticipate continuing to occupy those
spaces with clinic staff. Possibly exchange staff parking stall in Oak Street
with patient spaces in Fairview PV Ramp to put patient parking closer to
• Based upon 2014 Clinic volumes of 363,000 patient visits annually, 600
parking spaces would be anticipated to be needed at the new Clinic location.
• It is anticipated to add 500 new parking stalls on 3 full block subterranean
levels under the Clinic.
• It is anticipated to add 400 new parking stalls on 4 levels of above grade
structured parking on the site adjacent to the Clinic for patients and some
staff depending on availability.
• Children’s Hospital Stage1 parking need is approximately 300 stalls. The
Stage 2 Children’s program would largely be coming from the Riverside
Campus and would be in the area of 660 stalls.
• Total Children’s Hospital parking need is approximately 1,000 spaces.
Supply would be 500 clinic vacated stalls in the Fairview PV Ramp and
approximately 600 stalls to be built in 3 subterranean levels under the
• Significant capacity would be available at Riverside due to relocation of
programs into Children’s Hospital Stage 2 on the East Bank Campus.
Possible to demo Riverside Red Ramp.

04 Scenario 9:A
Wayfinding: (See attached site plan)

• It is anticipated to establish a unique Clinical District branding identity
and coordinated directional signage system to direct all Clinic and Hospital
patients/visitors to the Huron/Fulton intersection for vehicle entry into the
Clinical District regardless of the direction of approach.
• It is anticipated to design and install an intelligent traffic management
system to assist patient/visitor in finding their destination and available
parking.
• The wayfinding/branding system will likewise have a pedestrian component
to direct patient/visitors arriving by other modes of transportation to the
desired district destination.
Loading Dock:
• Due to site constraints and the available capacity within the Unit J dock,
it is anticipated to remodel the Unit J dock to improve its efficiency and
service the Children’s Hospital and Unit J through the Unit J dock.
• Due it physical distance, utility impediments and the capacity limitation
to service two hospitals and a clinic of the ACC’s expected volumes from
the Unit J dock, it is expected to construct a loading dock, most likely
subterranean, for the ACC Clinic at its new location.
People and Material Movement Between Facilities

(See attached comparative analysis)
• Given physical distances between facilities and characteristics/uses of the
areas between the facilities, automated systems for people moving will be
expensive to install and operate.
• Reliability of service could likewise be a significant challenge.
• Street based shuttles from clinic to hospital may still prove to be the most
efficient, reliable and cost effective means of movement. More study in
needed to finalize this issue.
Operational Integration between the Clinic and

Hospital sites
Infrastructure and Utilities

• Based on discussion with University Services, utility services are readily
available in the area for both the Clinic and Hospital with the exception of
steam service and electric service.
• Generating capacity for steam is currently available at the University Steam
Plant. Distribution infrastructure costs have been included in preliminary
budgeting.
• Systems upgrades to the capacity of the electrical grid in the Clinical District
have also bee included in the preliminary budgeting.
Site Capacity (See attached Stacking Plans)

• Significant site capacity for Phase I projects and future growth of the Clinic
Campus exists on the ACC site and adjoining property.
120
04 Scenario 9:A
• Site capacity at the Hospital site is predominantly vertical unless additional

occupied University buildings are vacated and demolished.
Future Development Potential

• Ability to stage phase I and II construction on the Masonic/VFW site is
extremely challenging.
• Tight site constraints will result in premium costs for construction.
• Tight site constraints will result in significant operational disruption and
patient wayfinding disruptions during the construction period.
Relocation/Swing Space Needs

Schematic


04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A
Children’s Hospital Macro Program

versity of Minnesota Children’s Hospital at THE Dannekin site.
1. The proposed facility will be located on the East Campus, on land

adjacent to the proposed Ambulatory Care Center (ACC), located on
the “Dannekin” site. It will be linked to the ACC.
2. Phase 1 will occur in two stages. Generally, all pediatric inpatient beds,
surgery, and imaging will relocate to the new facility in Stage 1. During
Stage 2, OB, NICU, and Adolescent Behavioral Services will relocate
from the Riverside Campus to the Children’s Hospital on the East
Campus.
Service Beds
OB (3 triage; 10 antepartum; 15 LDR’s; 31 Post Partum) 59
NICU 52
Adolescent MH 38
TOTAL 289
site (as opposed to the adjacent ACC). Two modules of 15 exam rooms
each will be provided (capacity of 74,000 visits per year (two visits
per room per hour, 7 hours per day. 252 days per year, at 70 percent
utilization)
7. Pediatric surgery will occur in dedicated operating rooms within
Children’s. Ten operating rooms will be provided.
9. All rooms will be private, including PICU, NICU and
Behavioral.

At 2,600 births, with a 30 percent c-section rate, 30 post partum beds would be
needed at a 65 percent occupancy level. This considers a 2.2 day ALOS for normal
vaginal births; 4.0 day ALOS for c-section births. At 2,600 births, up to 10 – 12
LDR’s (including one ICU) would be needed, assuming appropriate use of triage beds
(not LDR’s) for ruling in/out labor. LarsonAllen does not have data to determine if 10
antepartum rooms are needed.

52 beds suggested in Version 6.30.05.
122
04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A

11. Due to the distant location from Unit J and related support services,
Scenario 9 will require additional administrative and support spaces in
Phase 1, Stage 1, compared to Scenarios 7 and 8. There could be some
sharing of spaces with the ACC, but the type and amount is unknown
at this time.
THE “STRAW DOG”
cilities replaced in new construction. It is completed in two stages (described
below). Unit J and Mayo will marginally support the facility due to its dis-
tant from both these facilities.
At the end of Phase 1, the Riverside Campus is relatively unchanged. In ad-

dition, Masonic/VFW do not need to be razed as the Children’s facility is not
situated there.
Phase 2 is consistent with other previous scenarios. It consists of replacing

all Riverside adult inpatient and outpatient services (with/without Behavioral
Services) on the East Campus. This may be accomplished via vertical expan-
sion of the Unit J, or in combination with horizontal expansion onto selected
adjacent dorm sites (if available in the future.
At the end of Phase 2, the Riverside Campus could be reconfigured for other
UMMC or Fairview services, and/or sold.

• Adult services remain in Unit J and on the Riverside Campus. Pediatric
related services are relocated to the new Children’s facility.
• BMT/SOT will relocate to the new Children’s facility n Stage 1, assuming
that the ACC houses a new radiation therapy center.
• In Stage 1, NICU and OB will remain in their existing Riverside facilities,
with opportunity provided for future NICU expansion in existing facilities.
Riverside facilities, with some (undefined) level of refurbishment.
• Pediatric inpatient and outpatient surgery department will be situated in
new construction. Ten operating rooms and related support spaces will be

04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A
provided for pediatrics. This will “free-up” four to six operating rooms in
Unit J, allowing for growth and backfill, and/or renovation to create more
appropriately sized operating rooms and support spaces.
• The Unit J Pediatric Imaging Department will be relocated to new
construction. It will be part of a Diagnostic Service Core which includes
imaging, cardiology, specimen collection, and neurodiagnostic services.
Imaging equipment currently within the Unit J Imaging department will be
relocated to the new facility.
• A new Pediatric Emergency Department will be situated in new
construction.
• Additional parking will be required in and around the Dannekin site for the
Phase 1 Children’s Hospital. Between 200 – 300 stalls will be needed in
Phase 1, Stage 1, and another 250 – 350 spaces need for Phase 1, Stage 2.
(to be verified).
• Pediatric faculty offices will be situated in existing East Campus areas, unless
opportunity (and capital) exists for consolidation of spaces in or near the
new Children’s facility.
Phase 1, Stages 1 and 2, are depicted in visuals provided by HGA
124
04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A

Department/Function DGSF Comments/Modalities (DGSF)

Administration 6 people 1,500 COO; Financial; Physician Leader; New New 1,500
Admitting/Registration/Financial 4 staff; 1 coordinator 1,500 5 offices; workroom; waiting New New 1,500
Counseling
Birth and Family Education 6 staff and 1,500 Existing New 1,500
classroom
Business Office 2 staff 300 2 Workstations New New 300
Child/Life 8 staff (?) 1,600 Could be decentralized on nursing New New 1,600
units
Communications/Marketing 3 staff 600 New New 600
Family Resource Center 1-2 staff 1,000 Library; kiosks; storage New New 1,000
Foundation 2 staff 600 2 offices; waiting; workroom New New 600
Information Services 6 persons 2,500 5 workstations; 1 office; small New New 2,500
computer room; storage; burn-in
area; 3 data closets
Health Information Services/ 8 staff 1,600 7 workstations; 1 office; minimal New New 1,600
Q.M/ Risk Management. files; ROI; EPIC (digital/paperless)
Human Resources 4 staff and files 800 New New 800
Medical Staff Facilities 800 Physician lounge; records New New 800
completion; toilet
Meditation Room 600 New New 600
Patient Care Administration 8 staff 2,000 3 Supervisors; 1 care manager; 2 New New 2,000
Volunteers/Gift Shop 1,000 In public lobby; gift shop; In separate New New 1,000 ____
Subtotal 18,900 17,400 1,500

04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A

TREATMENT SERVICES
Behavioral Faculty Offices 30 staff 6,000 Guesstimate Existing New 6,000

Cardiopulmonary Services 3,000 No interventional; includes New New 3,000
respiratory therapy, Blood Gas; non-
invasive cardiology (4 procedure
rooms)
Emergency Services 10,000 visits 6,000 Majority are behavioral visits; 5 New New 6,000
(underestimated?) exam/consult rooms; 3 exam/
treatment rooms; 1 major exam/
treatment room; waiting; 1 negative
air room
Home Health 3-4 staff 600 New New 600
Integrative Medicine 2 staff 600 New New 600
Laboratory 8 staff on day shift 3,000 New New 3,000
- NICU Stat Lab 300 Existing New 300
- PICU Stat Lab 300 New New 300
- Surgery Stat Lab 300 New New 300
- Outpatient Spec. Collect. 1,000 New New 1,000
Lactation Area 3 Lactation rooms 800 Near OB/Nursery Existing New 800
1 office
Maternal/Fetal Medicine Clinic 6 exam rooms; 4 4,000 Existing New 4,000
Medical Imaging 1 CT; 1 MRI 12,600 Major interventional in Unit J. New New 12,600
1 R&F Unit Sedation area included.
1 Rad Unit
2 Ultrasound
1 Nuclear
1 Interventional
Room

TREATMENT SERVICES
Neurodiagnostics 3 procedure rooms 1,200 New New 1,200
Outpatient Behavioral Health 40,000 All outpatient programs and offices Existing New 40,000
Pediatric Clinic and “Gold Key” 19,000+ primary 18,000 Two modules of 15 exam rooms each New New 18,000
Pediatric Outreach 2-3 positions 600 New New 600
Pharmacy 6 staff on day shift 2,600 Use Pyxis throughout hospital; IV New New 2,600
add room; 1 pick station; solution
storage; office; Satellites on units
Radiation Therapy 1 Linac plus support 5,700 Provide with BMT Services ACC ACC
Rehab Services 5,000 PT/OT/Speech/Audiology; inpatient New New 5,000
only
Surgery/Recovery/Ambulatory 4,400 – 6,000 30,000 New New 30,000
operating rooms;
2 minor procedure
rooms
_________ ______ ______
Subtotal 141,300 84,800 51,100
126
04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A

PATIENT CARE UNITS
Med/Surg/PICU Units Universal Rooms 101,000 101 @ 1,000 DGSF/bed; very high New 101,000
by today’s standards
Birthing/Perinatal Services 34 PP/15 LDR/10 59,000 1,000 DGSF/bed; Above or below Existing New 59,000
antenatal/ 3 c- Surgery
section/ 33 nursery
Mental Health/CD 77 Beds 46,200 @ 600 DGSF/bed; all private rooms; Existing New 46,200
group rooms; dining; activity; school
NICU 52 Beds 28,600 @ 550 DGSF/bed Existing New 28,600
_________ ______ ______
Subtotal 289 beds 234,800 101,000 133,800
Space Estimated PHASE 1 LOCATION PHASE 1 S.F.

Department/Function Drivers DGSF Comments/Modalities (by floor) (DGSF)
SERVICES
Biomedical Engineering 4 technician 2,000 Work area; equipment cueing; parts New New 2,000
storage
Central Processing Services 4,000 CPC off-site; case cart prep; main New New 4,000
Employee Facilities 1,000 Male/Female locker rooms; toilets/ New New 1,000
showers
Existing Existing
Maintenance/Plant Operations 4.5 staff/day 4,000 Parts; shops; office; plan room; paint New New 4,000
selected functions
Materials Management 4,000 Break-out area; staging area; Dirty New New 4,000
Nutrition Services 13,000 Limited; kitchen; servery; dining for New New 13,000
150
On-Call Rooms 10 rooms 2,000 Private room; shared toilets/showers New New 2,000
Public Reception/Lobby 3,000 Lobby; toilet; resting areas New New 3,000
Storage – General 2,000 New New 2,000
_________ ______ _____
Subtotal 37,500 37,500

04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9A

EDUCATION
Auditorium 200 seats; theatre 8,000 New New 8,000

style
Conference/Classrooms 3,000 Mix of large and small rooms; New New 3,000
conferencing
Library/Media Center 1,500 New New 1,500
Medical Education Offices 1,000 New New 1,000
Medical Student Work Areas 1,000 New New 1,000
________ ______ ______
Subtotal 14,500 14,500 0
TOTAL NEW DGSF 447,000 255,200 186,400
ADD: Faculty Support Space 70 faculty plus 1.5 35,000 Existing Existing
support per staff =
175 staff
128
04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9B
Childrens’s Hospital Staging Plan

Based on LarsonAllen Macro Space Plan, Draft #2 Dated 9/21/05
Scenario 9 Children’s Hopsital Staging Plan at
Block 11 Adjacent to Proposed ACC Site
Phase 1 New Const Shell-out Remodel
Stage 1-New Construction DGSF DGSF DGSF
Med/Surg/PICU Beds (101 beds) 101,000
OR’s (10 each) 30,000
Imaging 12,600
Cardio 3,000
ER 6,000
Labs/STAT 4,600
Education 14,500
Home Health 600
Pharmacy 2,600
SubTotal Phase 1 Stage 1 255,200 -

Stage 1-Parking
3 levels subterranean 600 spaces
Potential to release 300 stalls in Oak Street Ramp back to UofM
Assumptions:
BMT stays at Unit J

04 Scenario 9:B
Exhibit 9B
Stage 2-Expansion to Stage 1 vertical and D/T horizontal

NICU (52 beds) 28,600
OB (59 beds) 59,000
NICU Stat Lab 300
Maternal/Fetal Clinic Office 4,000
Lactation Area 800
Outpatient Behavioral Services 40,000
Subtotal Phase 1 Stage 2 186,400 -

Assumptions:
Stage 1&2 provides a Materially Stand-Alone Children’s & Women’s
Hospital
Adults stay at Riv-East/West until future phase development occurs
Phase 2
Future Phase Single Site Consolidation would most likely be
Vertical on Block 11,
Adjacent to Block 11 on Frontier Hall Site
Adjacent to ACC on Block 12
Adjacent to ACC on Block east of Block 12
130
03 Scenario 9:C
Exhibit 9C
Ambulatory Care Clinic INTERIM REPORT

See Scenario 7, Exhibit 7C

Departments # of beds DGSF Total DGSF /Floor
Future Mechanical
04 Scenario 9:D
Future - 16 th floor TBD Stacking Plans
Future - 15 th floor TBD
scenario 9 Stacking Plan Future - 14 th floor TBD
Future - 13 th floor TBD

proposed
12th Floor - Mechanical 0
10th Floor - Mental Health 77 46,200 46,200

Outpatient Behavioral Health Offices (soft
9th Floor - space) 40,000 40,000
8th Floor - Peds Universal Rooms 48 48,000 48,000
7th Floor Peds Universal Beds (program need 6) 24 24,000 48,000 7th Floor Clinic 1 7200 7,200 11,700
BMT (program need 21) 24 24,000 Support 4,500
6th Floor - PICU 24 24,000 52,600 6th Floor - Clinic 5 7200 36,000 40,500
NICU 52 28,600 Support 4,500
5th Floor -
34 PP/15 LDR
49 49,000 49,000 5th Floor -
Clinic 5 7200 36,000 40,500
10 antenatal Support 4,500
3 c-section
33 nursery
4th Floor - OB Support/ Overflow 10 10,000 47,500 4th Floor - Clinic 5 7200 36,000 40,500
Rehab Services 5,000 Support 4,500
Medical Staff 4,000
Nutrition 10,000
Mechanical 6,000
3rd Floor- Surgery/Recovery /Ambulatory Surg 30,000 54,000 3rd Floor- Ambulatory Surg 25,000 39,200
Lab/ Support 20,000 Pharmacy 2,000
Support 4,000 Support/Office 7,200
Lab 5,000
2nd Floor Public reception/ Lobby 54,000 2nd Floor Education 6000 42,000
Admin, Gift Shop, etc 10,000 Clinic 5 7200 36,000

Support 9,000
Lab (STAT) 3,000
Pharmacy 2,600
Admin 7,000
Grade Lobby/Public 2,000 54,500 Grade Diagnostics 22,000 36,000

Admin, Gift Shop, etc 18,900 Admin 6,000
ED 8,000 Retail/lobby 8,000
Imaging 12,600
Café 4,000
Loading Dock 9,000
Sublevel 1 Ancillary and Support Services 31,000 31,000 Sublevel 1 Support - Materials Manage 4,000 4,000
Parking 130 Parking 130
Sublevel 2 Parking 750
Total Cars 1,010
Total Beds 308 Total Clinic Modules 21

Note:LarsonAllen is showing Note: Program Shows 21 clinic
289 Beds modules
Total DGSF 524,800 Total DGSF 254,400

DGSF to
BGSF Factor 1.30 DGSF to BGSF Factor 1.25
Children’s Hospital Total BGSF 682,240 ACC Total BGSF 318,000
Total Site BGSF 1,000,240
Proposed -Dinnaken Block Site - Children’s Hospital and ACC

04 Scenario 9:E
Site Plans
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
6/2006 - 6/2008
i
w
f
n
a
a Phase I
t
s
c
e
t
i
g
e
l
r
m
i
a
g
t
t
m
y
e
t
d
September 2005

Campus Open Space

w
P arking
a s rh ai dn ig M.D.H.
st so on na hv oe t e l
p a r k i n g r a m p
B uilding
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
& s a f e t y b l d g

w e a v e r
V ehic ular
j a c k s o n
P ed's &
h a l l d e n s f o r d
h a l l Ambulance Traffic
Minor
m o l m e o c o u s l a r &
h e a l a E xis
t ting h
b
s
a
c
s
i
ci
be
ec
in
l
o
c s
t
l
le c
o
u
o
s i
w
l
g e
e
r
y P arking
n c
r s talls )
(804
e Shuttle Route
&
b i o m e d P ublic /
e n g i n . P atient
P W B
S taff
b o y n t o n h e a l t h
s e r mv a i y c o e m e m o r i a l b u P arkingi l d i n g
t e r r R eloc ated
i t o r i a l h a l l Automated Kiosk/Wayfinding
existing o a k s t r e e t
underground r a m p
parking
c
r
h
e
i
h
l
a
d
b
d i e h l h a l l One Way T raffic Service below grade parking level 1
v
c a r J cd i o
a r e Unit
s n t r A mbulatory C linic
& c a n c e r
r
c n t r C hildren's C linic E xpans ion
i
e f r o Hos
n pital
t i Ceenterr h A rea
a l l
p i o n e e r h a l l
t P arking
y
c 175,000 gs f footprint
l
u - Parking Level 1: 130(CH)+185(ACC)
b
r e a s t r i v e r r o a d p - Parking
a r Levelc 2: 750(CH+ACC)
e l
e - Total: 1,065 stalls
s
e
a
r
c T raffic F rom I-94
A mbulanc e h E as t & Wes t
E ntranc e c
n
t
r

NOR T H
0 100 200 300

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 1
SEPTEMBER 2005
LOWER
LEVEL 1

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 1
SEPTEMBER 2005
LOWER
LEVEL 2

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 1
SEPTEMBER 2005
LEVEL 1

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 1
SEPTEMBER 2005
LEVEL 2

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 1
SEPTEMBER 2005
LEVEL 3

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 1
SEPTEMBER 2005
TYPICAL
LEVEL

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 2
SEPTEMBER 2005
TYPICAL
LEVEL

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 3
SEPTEMBER 2005
TYPICAL
LEVEL

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 4
SEPTEMBER 2005
TYPICAL
LEVEL

04 Scenario 9:F
Floor Plate Options
Clinical Campus
Ca Master Plan
Scenario 9
Option 5
SEPTEMBER 2005
TYPICAL
LEVEL

04 Scenario 9:G
Cost Model
Cost Model
Block 11adjacent to the Dinnaken Block

Location: Adjacent to Dinnaken Block

Size: Phase One, Stage 1&2, 289 beds 559,000 BGSF of New Space
Facility Size: Phase One, Stage 1 319,000 BGSF Children’s Facility

Acquisition 13,700,000
Skyway Interconnection Costs None Provided
Demolition and Abatement in Acquisition Cost

-
Access Premium -


600 Spaces 15,900,000


04 Scenario 9:G
Cost Model
Clarifications:
Based on LarsonAllen Scenario 9 Children’s Macro Space Program, Draft #2, Dated 9/21/05
Land cost included based on input from U of M Real Estate Department
No financing costs
Ambulatory Care Clinic


Acquisition -

Land cost -

-

400 stalls 9,600,000

Contingency 5% 8,959,672
146
04 Scenario 9:G
Cost Model
Clarifications:
Based on HGA planning scenario 9 plan enclosed
Cost Escalation estimated to mid-point of project schedule from 2005
No land cost
No financing costs
Minnesota Department of Health Building (Swing

Space) NOT NEEDED

Land Acquisition -
Acquisition -
Entitlement Costs -
Utility Capacity -
Abatement Costs -

None Required -
Construction Cost -
Interior Build-out-Shell Improv
Office to Office
Lab to Lab
Office to Clinic
Design Cost -
A&E Design-Remodel -
Parking Cost -
Other Project Budgets -

IT/Comm/Low Voltage/Moving 11% -
Permit Allowance 2% -
Project Management Allowance 5% -

04 Scenario 9:G
Cost Model
Subtotal -
Contingency 5% -
Escalation (from 2005) -
Total Cost Model -
Clarifications:
Cost Escalation included from 2005 to Construction Contract bid & award date
No improvement budget for Unassigned Space has been included
No parking land cost
No financing costs
148
04 Scenario 9:G
Cost Model
Block 11adjacent to the Dinnaken Block

Children’s Hospital-Stage 2
Location: Adjacent to Dinnaken Block
Size: Phase One, Stage 1&2, 289 beds 559,000 BGSF of New Space
Facility Size: Phase One, Stage 2 233,000 BGSF Children’s Facility
Land Acquisition -
Acquisition -
Skyway Interconnection Costs None Provided
Entitlement Costs -
Utility Capacity -
Demolition and Abatement in Acquisition Cost

-

Parking Cost -

Escalation (from 2005) 6 year 32,712,606

04 Scenario 9:G
Cost Model
Clarifications:
Based on LarsonAllen Scenario 9 Children’s Macro Space Program, Draft #2, Dated 9/21/05
Land cost included based on input from U of M Real Estate Department
No financing costs
150
04 Scenario 9:H
Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J
1 Ambulatory Care Clinic (ACC) 840 days Mon 7/3/06 Fri 9/18/09
8 Move UMP to ACC 0 days Fri 9/18/09 Fri 9/18/09 9/18
9
10
12 Site Acquisition 6 mons Mon 1/2/06 Fri 6/16/06
13 Clear Site 2 mons Mon 6/19/06 Fri 8/11/06
20
21 Chilrens Hospital-Stage 2 820 days Mon 9/6/10 Fri 10/25/13
Page 1

© October 2005 | HGA commission no. 2042-009-04
Report Prepared by
Hines | 5000 Wells Fargo Center Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 344-1200
HGA | 701 Washington Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 758-4564
LarsonAllen | 220 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 376-4723

Strategic Facility Planning Report (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic Facility Planning Report (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S T R AT E G I C FA C I L I T Y P L A N N I N G R E P O R T

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians

VOLUME III: CLINICAL SCIENCES CAMPUS PLAN

VOLUME III: SUPPLIMENTAL STUDIES:

01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 03 SCENARIO 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Assumptions and Descriptions A. Scenario Description and Program Assumptions

Program Summary B. Children’s Hospital Macro Program (Exhibit 8A)

I. Massing and Sun Angle Studies E. Site Plans

With this framework in mind, Volume I of the Clinical Sciences Campus

1.) Replace and consolidate Children’s hospital facilities

3.) Consolidate clinical laboratories

4.) Consolidate all Fairview-University Medical Center clinical

5.) Create consolidated facilities for the School of Public Health

7.) Synchronize Clinical Sciences Campus planning priorities with

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 

By December, 2004, the Clinical Campus Steering Committee had deter-

Assumptions and descriptions

Outpatient clinic adjacencies relative to inpatient services, while highly desir-

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 

SCENARIO 7 General Description:

SCENARIO 8 General Description:

SCENARIO 9 General Description:

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 

Existing AHC Facilities

Campus Open Space

L R T C ons truc tion / L ine 2007 Vehicular Traffic

T raffic F rom I-94

Overall Site Analysis

F airview R ivers ide

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 

A Future Expansion Existing

0 100 200 300

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 10

Existing AHC Facilities

Campus Open Space

L R T C ons truc tion / L ine 2007 Vehicular Traffic

Overall Site Analysis

F airview R ivers ide

0 100 200 300

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 11

Staging plan: Cost and schedule Summary

Description Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Scenario 9

Total Cost $341,000,000 $290,700,000 $386,500,000

Cost $215,900,000 $215,900,000 $213,000,000

Conclusion and Recommendation

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 13

SCENARIO DESCRIPTIONS & PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 15

– Operating Room Quantities and Configurations

Ambulatory Care Clinic Program Assumptions

Minnesota Department of Health Building (MDH)

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 17

Children’s Hosptial Macro Program

1. The proposed facility will be located on the East Campus, on land

10. All med/surg rooms will be sized to accommodate families, and be

THE “STRAW DOG”

At the end of Phase 1, the Riverside Campus is relatively unchanged.

Phase 2 is consistent with other previous scenarios. It consists of replacing all

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians 19

• The Unit J Pediatric Imaging Department will be relocated to new

Phase 1, Stages 1 and 2, are depicted in visuals provided by HGA

Space Drivers Estimated PHASE 1 LOCATION PHASE 1 S.F.

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians

Fairview Health Services | University of Minnesota | University of Minnesota Physicians