The Katzen Arts Center Washington, D.C.

The Katzen Arts CenterWashington, D.C.


Introduction

LEED Certification

Analysis

Excavation Support System Analysis

MEP Coordination

Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions

The Pennsylvania State UniversitySenior Thesis – Spring 2005

Jessica A. PotkovickConstruction Management

Option



Option


INTRODUCTION

Introduction


MEP Coordination

LEED Certification Analysis

Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Project Location: 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW

Washington, D.C. 20016

Function: Academic Space, Performance Center, Gallery

Size: 330, 000 SF

Stories: 6 Stories

Cost: $41, 000,000

Project Delivery: CM @ Risk

Construction Dates: May 1, 2003 – May 15, 2005

PROJECT INFORMATIONPROJECT INFORMATION

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Building Occupant: American University

Architect/Engineer: Einhorn Yaffee Prescott

Consultants: EDAW, Inc. (Landscaping) Alpha Corporation (Civil)

Cagley & Associates, Inc. (Structural) Miller, Beam, & Paganelli, Inc. (AV & Acoustic) Fisher Dachs Associates (Theatre)

Claude R. Engel Lighting Consultant (Lighting)

Construction Manager: Holder Construction Company

PROJECT TEAMPROJECT TEAM

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Architecture:

• Gateway to Campus

• Layout: Primarily Linear with Serpentine Effect

• Three Building Components

• Two Rotundas

• Roof Terrace/Roof Garden

• Water Feature

• Façade: Limestone Veneer with CMU Backup, Ground Face CMU, or Aluminum Storefront

• Skylights

ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMSARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMS

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Structural:

• Cast-in-Place Concrete

Lighting/Electrical:

• LED Emergency Lighting and Parkpack in Parking Levels

• Academic: Fluorescent, Recessed Parabolic Lights

• Gallery: Low Brightness, Recessed Fluorescent Wall Wash and Downlights

• Performance: Directional Downlights and Ellipsoidal Spotlights

• Power: 3 phase, 4 wire Switchboard Operating at 3000A, 480/277V

• 75kVA, 480-120/280V Phase Transformer

• Two 3 phase, 4 wire Panelboards at 480/277V and 120/277V

Mechanical:

• VAV and Constant Air Systems

• Six AHU’s, Two Cooling Towers, Two Chillers,

• Location: Parking Level 1 (Central Plant), 3rd Floor (Secondary Plant)

ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMSARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMS



Option


EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM

ANALYSIS

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Background:

• Original Excavation Support System

• Issue

• Current Excavation Support System

Goals:

Investigate Original and Current Excavation Support Systems

Determine the Impact of Switching Systems

Analyze other possible solutions in terms of constructability, cost, and schedule in order to recommend a solution for detailed analysis.

EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM ANALYSISEXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM ANALYSIS

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


ORIGINAL EXCAVATION SUPPORT ORIGINAL EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEMSYSTEM

• Soldier Piles

•Tiebacks

•Timber Lagging

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


• Posts and Soldier Piles

• Bracing

• Timber Lagging

CURRENT EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEMCURRENT EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Schedule:• Division of Component A into two Parts

• Interrupts Excavation Flow

• Slower Excavation Period

• Deconstruction of Bracing Required

Cost:

IMPACTIMPACT

Additional Requirements Cost

Piles $20,815.28

Reaction Post $45,909.36

Web Stiffeners $2,340.00

Mobilization $248.50

Subtotal $69,313.14

Total Cost (w/Location Factor) $67,164.43

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS

• Steep Angle Tiebacks

• Soldier Piles (Driven Close)

• Sheet Piles

• Slurry Wall

• Sheet Piles + Slurry Wall

• Secant Piles

• Purchase Property

• Purchase Property and Sell Back

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES

Disadvantages:

• Soil Bearing Capacity

• Additional Cost

• Additional Construction Time

• Site Constraints

Advantages:

• Potential for Payback

• Constructability Plan Remains the Same

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

Current Excavation Support System:

Had Major Impact on Constructability

Little Impact on Schedule/Cost

Therefore…

An alternate solution must have as little schedule/cost impact as possible.

Suggestions for Further Detailed Analysis

Purchase Property

Purchase Property/Sell Back



Option


MEP COORDINATION

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Background/Proposal:

• MEP Coordination Process

• Previous Research

Goals:

Identify Areas MEP Contractors could use 3D CAD Technology

Create a CAD Implementation Plan for Holder Construction

MEP COORDINATION AND CAD IMPLEMENTATIONMEP COORDINATION AND CAD IMPLEMENTATION

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


PLANPLAN

Hire Staff

Technology Selection

Marketing

Estimating

Project Planning

Construction Sequencing/Scheduling

Material Management

Foreman Planning/Field Supervision

Shop Drawings

As-Builts

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


-Mike Duwell, Preconstruction Manager

• Holder Comments

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION



Option


LEED CERTIFICATION

ANALYSIS

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


LEED CERTIFICATION ANALYSISLEED CERTIFICATION ANALYSIS

Background:

• Evolution of Research Proposal

Goals:

Determine Goals of the USGBC

Determine Needs of the Building Industry

Compare the objectives of the USGBC and the opinions of the building industry to establish if their needs are being met. If not, suggest actions for meeting those needs.

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Intention was to Identify:• History and Organization Goals

• Statistics on LEED Project Applicants vs. Actual Project Certifications

• Credits Most/Least Often Applied For

• Process/Timeline of Version Revision

USGBC INTERVIEWUSGBC INTERVIEW

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


-Sabrina Morelli, LEED Coordinator

LEED Letter Templates

Documentation Requirements

Rating System Language

Certification Process

Rating System Updates

LEED Version 2.2

USGBC INTERVIEWUSGBC INTERVIEW

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


Survey Goals:• Why Owner’s choose not to go for/complete a LEED certification?

• Determine the current process used to document credit fulfillment.

• Determine satisfaction with current LEED documentation requirements.

• Identify how familiar the industry is with current changes in the process and if they believe they are positive.

• Identify difficult credits to achieve and why.

BUILDING INDUSTRY SURVEYBUILDING INDUSTRY SURVEY

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


BUILDING INDUSTRY SURVEYBUILDING INDUSTRY SURVEY

-13 Responses

LEED Letter Templates

Documentation Requirements

Rating System Language

Certification Process

Rating System Updates

LEED Version 2.2

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONSUSGBC:Provide a detailed list of specific credit requirements.

Modify the reference guide so that designer and contractor requirements are addressed separately or create individual designer and contractor guides.

Offer assistance with credit evaluation throughout the course of the project.

Or, create a position at the USGBC for LEED Inspectors.

Continue to find ways to streamline the documentation process and reduce the amount of time and paperwork that is required to put submittals together.

Building Industry:

Take an active part in the public comment period.

Offer contractor focused LEED training to associates and subcontractors to clarify LEED certification process and rating system.



Option


CONCLUSIONS

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option



Goals:

Examine both the original and current systems and determine the impact of switching.

Determine if there is an alternate solution for further detailed analysis by investigating other systems in terms of constructability, schedule, and cost.

Conclusion:

Major Impact on Constructability; Little Impact on Cost and Schedule

Further Investigate Purchasing the Property or Purchasing the Property/Selling Back

MEP Coordination

Goal:

Create a CAD Implementation Plan for Holder Construction

Conclusion:

Currently in Process of Similar Plan


Goal:

Determine if the goals of the USGBC are aligned with the needs of the Building Industry.

Conclusion:

Needs are not currently met; Satisfaction will most likely improve following the release of LEED Version 2.2.

Introduction


MEP Coordination


Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions



Option



Option


I would like to thank the following people for their assistance and support…

Holder Construction Company

American University

Penn State Faculty

United States Green Building Council

Building Industry Members

Family and Friends

Questions?

The Katzen Arts Center Washington, D.C.

Documents

Transcript of The Katzen Arts Center Washington, D.C.