INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREDESIGN REVIEW FOR NON-ACADEMIC FACILITIES
(Including Revenue Fund Projects)
PURPOSE: The attached review form provides consultants and campuses a framework for a project predesign. This form is to be
used for non-academic (primarily revenue fund) facilities.
DOCUMENTATION:
Predesigns: In preparing the necessary predesign documentation, review the following documents that are under Planning and
Programming web heading on the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Facilities website:
www.facilities.mnscu.edu./facilities/planning-programming/predesign. The primary resource document is:
 Predesign Guide Presentation (Updated June 2010)
Financials: In preparing the necessary financial documentation in support of a non-academic project, go to:
www.facilities.mnscu.edu./facilities/revenuefund. The primary resource documents are:
 Pro Forma Templates. Analysis based on program/project type - Parking Facility, Residence Hall, Student Union, Wellness
Center
 Project Cost Sheet This project cost sheet is nearly identical to the one used for academic / general fund projects, and is
utilized during the entire project to summarize the costs by phase of the project.
 Debt Service Estimator. This is to provide an order of magnitude for debt service based on the anticipated project cost and
including the estimated bond costs.
PREDESIGN LAYOUT:
 Cover Letters: Consultant to campus president affirming that the report meets Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
criteria, signed by a registered architect/engineer with accompanying registration number AND a formal submission letter
from the Campus President to Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities.
 Table of Contents:
1. Summary Statement
2. Project Background Narrative
3. Project Description (scope with site and space program and alternate solutions)
4. Student Consultation/Local Jurisdiction Requirements
5. Sustainability/Energy Statues
6. Financial Information - capital expenditures
7. Financial Information - ongoing operating expenditures
8. Schedule
9. Technology Plan/Budget
10. Appendix
PREDESIGN FORMAT AND REVIEW TIMELINE:
The system office requires the campus to submit all predesigns for review and feedback at the 50% and 95% completion level.
New requirements for predesign:
 Effective with the 2015 Revenue bond sale, the submittal and review process will utilize Sharepoint and campuses will be
required to submit their documentation
 Predesign Presentations and Approvals by System Office. A formal presentation of the predesign will be presented to the
Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities.
 50% first submittal: The 50% submittal to the system office represents a predesign that is about ½ completed and has
established some of the basic programmatic impacts on the overall scope, cost, and schedule. A 50% may describe the square
footage, potential cost, schedule, project description, sustainability issues, and identify the options considered.
 95% second submittal: Should be complete, having incorporated feedback from the 50% submittal, except for cover letters.
 Final submittal: 100% complete: one copy in a binder PLUS 1 file on Sharepoint.
 For Written Document:
o 3-ring binder format using text font no less than 10 points.
o Number pages by Section - allows easier corrections by sections. Printing on both sides is encouraged.
o Ensure entire document is capable of clear black/white reproduction.
o Label front AND spine, with the following: Name of Institution, Predesign status (50% first submittal, 95% second and
100% final), Name of Consulting Firm, contact information, address, phone, email, and date.
Last Updated: May 15, 2013
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
PREDESIGN REVIEW for Non-ACADEMIC Facilities
(Including Revenue Fund Projects)
Institution: X
Proposed Presentation Date: X
Consultant: X
Date Received:
X
Date Reviewed:
X
Review
Status:
X%
Reviewed by: Greg Ewig, System Director, Capital Development, 651.201.1775 gregory.ewig@so.mnscu.edu
Lisa Jansen, Facilities Senior Planner, 651.201.1788 lisa.jansen@so.mnscu.edu
Overall Comments:
1. SUMMARY STATEMENT
Responsibilities
Summarize the basic data: 1) scope, 2) cost and 3) schedule that details the program delivery of the
what, where, who, how, why and when that also includes evaluation of alternative solutions for the Consultant:
Synthesize
scope, cost and schedule.
document
 Brief description of proposed program that describe scope of work, operational programs affected, project
Campus: Provide,
size in gross square footage, and major components of the work.
 Highlight major facilities issues impacted (deferred maintenance or renewal issues, space utilization data, assist, note
improvement, sustainability, B-3 guidelines adherence, renewable energy and FCI addressed in the project consultation,
business plan,
scope)
 Construction cost and Project Cost breakdown relating to demolition, new construction, renovation and review and approve
document
renewal.
 Funding breakdown: identify Total Project Cost and all Source of Funds. Describe revenue mechanism to
pay for the capital and ongoing operational costs Include fee or revenue (average cost per FYE).
 Project schedule including milestone dates and funding sources for the project.
 Include brief summary of the alternative or options evaluated:
o Predesign should present a series of potential options for delivering the academic program.
o Consultation: Note letters from the student consultation process, president and consultant (with
appropriate registration numbers) to be included in the final 90% review.
Reviewer’s Comments:
2. PROJECT BACKGROUND NARRATIVE - SCOPE
Responsibilities
Summary of the project scope based on the following:
 Provide brief statement relating to the project process, planning process, student consultation, participants Consultant:
and significant outcomes during the process, operational programs, relationship to deferred maintenance Gather information,
and upcoming renewal needs, strategic plan, course schedule related to the project, learning or workforce analysis, synthesis,
review document
and economic vitality.
 Facilities Master Plan; note the graphic relationship between this project and Master Plan. If proposed
Campus: Provide
scope and project varies significantly from Master Plan then additional information may be required.
 Include supporting data; analysis or studies which support the proposed program and need; summary of documentation,
business plan
surveys, market data, enrollment, workforce, regional issues, etc.
 Municipal partnerships; to what extent has the university or college establish strategic relationships with analysis, review
document
the city and how will that improve their development of campus.
 Facilities systems summary; include deferred maintenance backlog, FCI (Facilities Condition Index) of
campus and affected buildings. FCI = deferred maintenance/current replacement value, and future
renewal needs data obtained from the FRRM, Facilities Reinvestment Renewal Model.
 Sustainability highlights; note sustainable concepts and specifics or potential impact the campus is
engaged that may impact this program or project.
 Include alternatives or options that have been evaluated for this program delivery including dollar amount
and square feet. List any alternative program delivery, site, leasing or building options that been studied
or explored.
 Include photos of proposed renovation area or potential new area location.
Reviewer’s Comments:
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION - SCOPE
Responsibilities
Provide detailed information relating to the design intent, project program scope and project process.
 Purpose/rationale of the project: Describe the scope of the project. Include aerial map, site and building Consultant:
plans of proposed project. Provide additional graphics which visually describe the project.
Note: Synthesize,
graphics should not be to the level of detail found in Schematic Design – the goal is to identify general analyze, develop
options document
concepts that explain size of spaces and contain the scope to evaluate cost and schedule.
 Strategic Framework: Describe how this project incorporates and advances the strategic framework.
Campus: Input,
http://www.mnscu.edu/about/strategicplan.html
review and approve
 Provide building data sheets that explain the scope of the project:
o Physical condition audit and recommendations. Renovation projects must include detailed photos of the document
interior and exterior spaces. An evaluation by a specialized consultant is required of conditions and
cost for correction of significant exterior work or major infrastructure work (mechanical, electrical,
civil, etc). Contact System Office at beginning of the Predesign to review any specialized requirements.
o Deferred maintenance backlog and renewal data: Note existing and proposed and/or renewal building
and campus FCI. Address how will this project impact the FCI.
o Current conditions, adjacencies, spatial issues and user needs for academic programs. Provide
adjacency diagrams for all spaces and a diagrammatic layout of spaces that reflect the programmatic
conditions.
o Bibliography: state applicable codes, standards, cited research and publications referenced.
 Sustainability: scope should include analysis of sustainable concepts and specifics of site development,
specific building items (intended design, systems, building materials, etc), operational issues, potential
geothermal system to augment heating and/or cooling.
 State special security issues or safety concerns impacting the operations or location of this project.
 Provide project alternative analyses and options relating to program, site options, and/or building
scope and cost options, etc.
o Clearly identify alternate solutions such as a reduction in the scope of work (programmatic and/or
project), a building project emphasizing reuse and renovation of an existing structure, partnerships with
nearby institutions, alternate project delivery methods, etc. The alternate solutions are intended to
utilize the knowledge gleaned during the Predesign process of the scope analysis to create a series of
options that would allow the program to function without one single large project.
o Analyze alternate solutions, methodologies and practices for the proposed project, and provide a
recommendation and justification for each alternate solution.
Reviewer’s Comments:
4. STUDENT CONSULTATION / LOCAL JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS
Summary: Address and outline the consultative process the campus undertook and is undertaking
with student leadership and student body; explain the participation of students in the project
committee work; discuss and summarize the specific work with the local jurisdiction related to
alignment of project and building and/or zoning code conversations.
 Identify the dates/times the consultant and campus leadership met with students leading up to the
predesign work
 Identify and include copies of formal presentation provided to students
 Describe how students were solicited for feedback in the process – student referendums, surveys, task
forces; social media campaigns
 Summarize meeting minutes with local jurisdictions in preparation for this project; were there conditions
imposed on the project that would effect other development on the campus;
 Identify codes and requirements the local jurisdictions require of the project
Reviewer’s Comments:
Responsibilities
Consultant:
Document, review,
and include
compliance or
reason for noncompliance.
Campus: Input,
review and approve
document
5. SUSTAINABILITY/ENERGY STATUTES - SCOPE
Summary: Address energy conservation and sustainability issues/solutions that may or could be
applicable to this project. As a policy matter, revenue bond financed projects should comply with the
same requirements for energy and sustainability as general obligation financed projects, and the
predesign document should incorporate how those requirements will be met. The following statutes
are relevant to non-academic projects:
 Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines (MSBG) Minn. Stat. §16B.235, identify Sustainable and High
Performance goals for the project using “The State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines” at
www.csbr.umn.edu/b3/index.html. Adequate funding for this type of building construction. (Verify if
can include a table of energy design initiatives to exceed the State Energy Code by 30%).
 Minn. Stat. §16B.32, Subd 2: Energy Conservation Goals (voluntary; may participate in Program – not
mandatory)
 Minn. Stat. §16B.325: Sustainable Guidelines (B3) for new building or adds/replaces a stand-alone
mechanical system. (after Jan 1, 2009, all renovations over 10,000 sf)
 Minn. Stat. §216B.241 Subd 9:
Sustainable Building 2030 - Energy Conservation Goals
www.mn2030.umn.edu
 Waste Management: Suggest that document includes a statement (and corresponding costs and schedule
impact) that the project adequately addresses any cost or schedule issues for the contractor to provide and
submit a “Waste Management and Recycling Program Plan” for both demolition and construction that
will advance concepts of sustainability.
 Integration. Energy Efficiency should be an integral part of the Scope description of the project (Section
3) and the Cost (section 5 and 6) and Schedule (section 7) as appropriate.
Reviewer’s Comments:
6. FINANCIAL INFORMATION - CAPITAL EXPEDITURES - COST
Summary: Estimate the capital expenditures for the project including alternate solutions and use the
state approved forms (Project Cost, Project Detail, Construction) displaying all capital funding
requirements through the life of the project. Use the Agency Capital budget form as found on the
website www.finance.mnscu.edu/facilities/capitalbudget/index.html.
 Special Note on Project Management Fee line item: Revenue Fund participants are charged a “fund
assessment” each year, which covers payment for the system program staff management costs. It is not
necessary to add project management fees for state staff in cost estimates.
 GSF/Cost. Include project gross square footage and separate line items for new construction, renovation
and renewal costs.
 Budget/Schedule Impacts. Evaluate unique schedule issues (academic, move-in times, optimum
construction schedules) for schedule options and construction sequencing to optimize construction dollars.
Need to provide alternate schedules that may impact the scope or cost of the project. Provide budget and
schedule impact for atypical considerations that may affect the project.
 Funding Sources. Identify all project funding sources including campus, third party and revenue bond
resources.
 Cost Comparisons. Reference other cost estimation (i.e. comparable campuses or regional facilities whose
construction cost is relevant to the current project).
 Other Cost Impacts. Confirm adequacy of construction cost budget in relationship to:
o Sustainability: Cost need to be reflected as options or as part of the final overall cost.
o Security Assessment for the program to determine is additional security costs need to be included.
o Variances Anticipated: Calculate the effect of any design variance on the overall cost estimate. Note:
Any “Variance” requests from the Minnesota State College and University Design and Construction
Standards require approval by the System Office.
o Utility Infrastructure: Verify existing utility infrastructure contains adequate capacity to support the
proposed building/ facility or renovation. Incorporate costs for upgrades, if any, into the budget.
o Identify special mechanical or electrical needs or upgrades.
o Environmental Conditions: Determine the extent of asbestos abatement, fuel tank removal,
contaminated soils or other hazardous material clean-up costs for the proposed project or site if
applicable.
 Total Project Cost. Beyond construction cost, determine the full project cost, including, but not limited to
Furniture Fixtures & Equipment, interior/exterior signage, exterior landscaping and fixtures,
telecommunication and information technology infrastructure, security systems, or specialized equipment
such as lockers, trash compactor, window coverings, laundry or washing equipment, etc.
Responsibilities
Consultant:
Document, review,
and include
compliance or
reason for noncompliance.
Campus: Input,
review and approve
document
Responsibilities
Consultant:
Synthesize,
analyze, clearly
note expenditures
and how obtained,
develop options,
document
Campus: Input on
operations and debt
capacity and
overall Business
Plan, review and
approve document
 Financial Models. Describe the types of alternative or optional solutions considered, such as phasing the
funding request over several revenue bonding sessions, seeking private funding, a phased construction
schedule, a mix of private and public funding.
Reviewer’s Comments:
7. FINANCIAL INFORMATION - ONGOING OPERATING EXPEDITURES - COST
Summary: Estimate the project effects on operating budgets associated with the design, construction,
occupancy and on-going operation of the project area. Note alternative solutions may require
different operating costs. Campus to quantify the on-going operating expenditures and revenues
(with assistance from consultant). Use the state form to describe and schedule operating revenues and
expenditures associated with the occupancy and operation of the project area.
 Financing Plan (ProForma) Provide a Financing Plan using the template provided by the system office,
which includes revenue, expenditures and liabilities that include the ongoing operational costs of the
facility, such as utilities, maintenance, Repair and Replacement and debt incurred for the life of the
Revenue Bonds (approximately 20 years) or other financing. Include staffing levels and corresponding
salaries, building repair, replacement and maintenance. Include assumptions and revenue generation, such
as the student fees, enrollment projections, estimated cost per credit (where applicable) or total impact to
student cost. Describe items that may impact operating expenses in the futures:
Example 1: impact of additional maintenance engineers required during and/or after new building
construction. Example 2: Operating cost for energy (HVAC, electrical and other utilities). $5-$9 per
square foot is suggested to reflect these associated costs.
 Review and incorporate any COPE (Construction Occupancy Protection exposure) findings and how it
will be addressed with the project.
 Debt Service. Address campus debt capacity for this particular project. Contact Metody Popov (Financial
Reporting Supervisor), 651-201.1738 or metody.popov@so.mnscu.edu
Responsibilities
Consultant:
Synthesize,
analyze, develop
options document
Campus: Input on
operations and debt
capacity and
overall Business
Plan, review and
approve document
Reviewer’s Comments:
8. SCHEDULE
Summary: The schedule should identify the overall schedule and major milestones for the project,
including any alternative scheduling scenarios.
 Schedule presentation. Graphically on a bar chart a realistic schedule for all major project stages
including design, construction and completion. The phases may be broken into their component parts,
such as site selection and acquisition, government actions and proceedings required, designer selection,
design approvals, construction, occupancy and commissioning. Also, if relevant: hazardous material
abatement, phasing time, relocation/move time and any potential long-lead material deliveries. Include
quality control/ coordination review and cost in the design budget; of which a minimum of one month is
suggested for this review (but that can be accelerated with adequate notice).
 Student consultation and constituent or governmental review periods. Review periods should be
identified and shown for each project phase, which may include campus staff, students, project manager
and System Office Program Manager. Length of review period should be a minimum of two weeks to six
weeks depending on size and complexity of project.
 Schematic Design Considerations. Schematic Design has a longer review period: Formal approval by the
System Office is required upon completion of Schematic Design. This process entails:
o Submittal. Submission of Schematic Design document to the Program Manager,
o Review Meeting. Review Meeting attended by consultant, campus representatives and system office
facilities staff. Timing: two to three weeks following submission of Schematic Design. This working
session is a forum to discuss and review issues.
o Presentation. Upon completion of session, Schematic Design presentation scheduled for campus and
consultants to present to Facilities staff and the Vice Chancellor – Chief Financial Officer.
Reviewer’s Comments:
Responsibilities
Consultant:
Synthesize,
analyze, develop
options document
Campus: Input,
review and approve
document
9. TECHNOLOGY PLAN/BUDGET
Summary: The technology plan should incorporate a robust description of the needs and anticipated
costs for the technology infrastructure that will support the program.
 Describe the technology applications and associated budget detail included in the scope of this project
and/or any of the alternatives or options studied.
 Describe the impact and improvements of any technology that impacts the overall scope or cost, including
cost effectiveness that the project will have on current and future infrastructure. Detail additional positive
outcomes that may be a direct or indirect consequence of technology implementation associated with this
project.
Responsibilities
Consultant:
Synthesize,
analyze, develop
options document
Campus: Input,
review and approve
document
Reviewer’s Comments:
10. APPENDIX
Include all supporting information that will assist in the development of the project as it proceeds into design, construction and
on-going operations: academic master plan or housing master plan reference material (if appropriate), program delivery
discussions, research and reference material, meeting minutes, technology master plan reference material, ISRS Space Utilization
data, FRRM data, workforce/demographic data, photos, infrastructure reports on any significant areas of concern (roof loading,
mechanical or electrical capacity, etc), soil reports, or related supporting information, project visit notes, websites, etc.
Note: The purpose of the Appendix is to have a useful reference for campus administration and facilities staff to house a 'living
document' which contains important facilities related information as it impacts this predesign.