The Katzen Arts Center. Washington, D.C.

Transcription

1

2

3 System

4 INTRODUCTION

5 PROJECT INFORMATION System Project Location: 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW Function: Academic Space, Performance Center, Gallery Size: 330, 000 SF Stories: 6 Stories Cost: $41, 000,000 Project Delivery: Risk Construction Dates: May 1, 2003 May 15, 2005

6 PROJECT TEAM System 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

7 ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMS System 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

8 System Structural: Cast-in-Place Concrete Lighting/Electrical: Mechanical: ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMS 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, /280V Phase Transformer Two 3 phase, 4 wire Panelboards at 480/277V and 120/277V VAV and Constant Air Systems Six AHU s, Two Cooling Towers, Two Chillers, Location: Parking Level 1 (Central Plant), 3 rd Floor (Secondary Plant)

9 EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM ANALYSIS

10 EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM ANALYSIS System Background: Goals: Original System Issue Current System Investigate Original and Current 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.

11 System ORIGINAL EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM Soldier Piles Tiebacks Timber Lagging

12 CURRENT EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEM System Posts and Soldier Piles Bracing Timber Lagging

13 System Schedule: Division of Component A into two Parts Interrupts Excavation Flow Slower Excavation Period Deconstruction of Bracing Required Cost: Additional Requirements IMPACT Cost Piles $20, Reaction Post $45, Web Stiffeners $2, Mobilization $ Subtotal $69, Total Cost (w/location Factor) $67,164.43

14 ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS System Steep Angle Tiebacks Soldier Piles (Driven Close) Sheet Piles Slurry Wall Sheet Piles + Slurry Wall Secant Piles Purchase Property Purchase Property and Sell Back

15 System ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Disadvantages: Soil Bearing Capacity Additional Cost Additional Construction Time Site Constraints Advantages: Potential for Payback Constructability Plan Remains the Same

16 CONCLUSION System Current 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 Purchase Property Purchase Property/Sell Back

17 MEP COORDINATION

18 MEP COORDINATION AND CAD IMPLEMENTATION System Background/Proposal: Process Previous Research Goals: Identify Areas MEP Contractors could use 3D CAD Technology Create a CAD Implementation Plan for Holder Construction

19 PLAN System Hire Staff Estimating Construction Sequencing/Scheduling Foreman Planning/Field Supervision As-Builts Technology Selection Marketing Project Planning Material Management Shop Drawings

20 CONCLUSION System -Mike Duwell, Preconstruction Manager Holder Comments

21 LEED CERTIFICATION ANALYSIS

22 LEED CERTIFICATION ANALYSIS System Background: Goals: Evolution of Research Proposal 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.

23 System USGBC INTERVIEW 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

24 System USGBC INTERVIEW -Sabrina Morelli, LEED Coordinator LEED Letter Templates Documentation Requirements Rating System Language Certification Process Rating System Updates LEED Version 2.2

25 BUILDING INDUSTRY SURVEY System 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.

26 BUILDING INDUSTRY SURVEY System -13 Responses LEED Letter Templates Documentation Requirements Rating System Language Certification Process Rating System Updates LEED Version 2.2

27 System CONCLUSIONS USGBC: 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.

28 CONCLUSIONS

29 System System Goals: Conclusion: 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. Major Impact on Constructability; Little Impact on Cost and Schedule Further Investigate Purchasing the Property or Purchasing the Property/Selling Back Goal: Conclusion: Create a CAD Implementation Plan for Holder Construction Currently in Process of Similar Plan Goal: Conclusion: Determine if the goals of the USGBC are aligned with the needs of the Building Industry. Needs are not currently met; Satisfaction will most likely improve following the release of LEED Version 2.2.

30 System 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

31 ?