HEGY Progress Report-Final by liuqingyan

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 44

									                              A Final Report
                     Submitted to Dr. Joseph P. Martin

          And The Senior Design Project Faculty of Drexel University




         Improving Pedestrian Access
   To The Delaware River Waterfront
                                      CAE 17-2003



                       HEGY Engineering

Regina Esposito                                        Civil & Architectural    Engineering
Bryan Haag                                                     Architectural    Engineering
Christopher Gee                                        Civil & Architectural    Engineering
Adam Yuhas                                             Civil & Architectural    Engineering



   Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Senior Design Project, CAE 493,
                                     May 30th, 2002
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow

Abstract

      Philadelphia is considered to be the historical capital of the United

States. With many attractions from east to west, both in the entertainment

and historical realms, Philadelphia is the major tourist attraction on the east

coast. However, a problem resides in the current infrastructure of the

waterfront on the Delaware River, the Penn’s Landing region. We pledge to

reconnect this section of the city with the many attractions that currently

exist, creating an obvious travel path and sensible flow from Philadelphia’s

Center City to Camden, New Jersey. Our objective is clear; we will create a

decking that will connect Front Street to Penn’s Landing, covering the main

obstacles of this area, Interstate 95 and Columbus Boulevard. We will use

this space to serve the public and will not encourage the use or large scale

building construction, as previous failed attempts had suggested. The scope

of this project will serve the local and tourist population, serving as a place

for public gathering, a refreshing escape from metropolitan activity.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104    Page 2 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Table of Contents                                                   Pages

Introduction                                                         4–7

Problem Summary                                                      8–9

Solution                                                           10 – 11

Pedestrian Circulation Study                                       12 – 13

Architectural Solution                                             14 – 15

Structural Solution                                                16 – 20

Utilities                                                          21 – 23

Construction Schedule                                                 24

Tasks Accomplished                                                    25

Team History                                                       26 – 28

Spring Term Schedule                                                  29

Budget                                                                30

References                                                            31

Appendix A - Circulation                                           32 – 33

Appendix B - Architectural                                         34 – 35

Appendix C - Structural                                            36 – 39

Appendix D - Utilities                                             40 – 41

Appendix E – Construction Schedule                                    42

Appendix F – Budget                                                43 – 44

Résumés                                                            45 – 48




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 3 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Introduction

   Philadelphia, the fifth largest city in the nation, is a human scale city,

offering activities for enjoyment, education and enrichment that are not

available elsewhere in the surrounding region. Philadelphia is one of the few

planned cities, with the result being that many attractions in the “Greene

Country Towne” are contained in a core stretching about two miles East-West

between the Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers, and three quarters of a mile

North-South between Spring Garden and South Streets.         From West to East,

the atmosphere varies, from reflection and recreation at Fairmont Park and

the Art Museum, through urban bustle around City Hall and the Avenue of

the Arts, to the restaurant resurgence and then the rich history “East of

Broad” at Independence National Park.

   However, there is a gap in continuity with regards to including the

Delaware River waterfront. While efficient in moving traffic through the city,

Delaware (Columbus) Avenue and I-95 are perceived as, and thus actually

serve as, barriers to elective pedestrian access to the Penn’s Landing. This is

particularly unfortunate as there has been investment in the Camden

waterfront by the DRPA and the State of New Jersey, including an aerial tram

that is under construction to connect the Philadelphia and Camden

waterfronts. I-95 also affects the linkage between this interstate tie and

Center City. Perhaps the highway barrier has contributed to the demise of

several plans for dense private development of Penn’s Landing. However,

solution of the problem of pedestrian access could be more effective if the




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 4 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
planned use of the Penn’s Landing was changed to open public use, a

complementary waterfront version of the Benjamin Franklin Parkway.

   The lack of a comfortable, seamless walkable connection between Front

Street and Penn’s Landing detracts from its use on two scales: the entire

“between the rivers” city core described above, and more locally, completing

the diverse but continuous web of activity “East of Broad” during and beyond

business hours. A diverse set of populations would employ better access to

Penn’s Landing, including both Center City and metropolitan area residents,

and visitors from beyond the area. The first group is increasing, with the

2000 census reporting a 57% growth in Center City population over the

preceding decade. Much of this growth was in proximity to Penn’s Landing,

including waterfront redevelopment to the South along Delaware Avenue,

and inland growth in Old City and Northern Liberties. The upcoming opening

of the Constitution Center just a few blocks from Penn’s Landing will bring

more visitors.

   There is actually more potential to use Penn’s Landing as an attraction

and “anchor” than is indicated above. Few cities have what Philadelphia has:

two waterfronts of different character bracketing “downtown”, the busy

Delaware and the subtle, quieter Schuylkill River.        A common theme in

attracting visitors to downtowns over the last few decades has been to

exploit whatever waterfront exists. San Antonio and Providence each have a

Riverwalk, South Street Seaport opens Manhattan to a magnificent harbor,

and grouping fixed attractions at Baltimore Harbor is a legendary success.

Penn’s Landing, has features to attract people to just be there. It is framed



HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 5 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
by an elegant bridge, the River moves and is still a route of oceanic shipping,

and there is an interesting horizon on the Camden waterfront. Boston is the

only other Eastern city with both a “green necklace” riverfront (Charles River

esplanade) and a working, but accessible harbor front. A major impetus for

the “Big Dig” was to restore the downtown connection with the harbor.

   With the city being a half mile or so “wide” bordered by a waterfront with

a variety of attractions, different types of circulation will meet the needs of

different populations. The most apparent pattern is emerging from the city

onto Front Street along any of the major streets, i.e., from downtown along

Market, from Independence Hall at Chestnut and from the restaurant district

at South Street. There is a value to allowing pedestrians to make a “beeline”

to a visible attraction at any point along Penn’s Landing. Another circulation

pattern is coordination with a parallel interior route along parkland. The Big

Dig in Boston will also provide a park strip two to five blocks away along the

entire length of the waterfront. One can imagine having a trip origin to the

south, walking along the interior park, and taking a right through main

streets to the waterfront when the mood strikes.        Independence Park and

Washington Square already exist here, parallel to the Delaware River. Finally,

there are loop walks. Taking advantage of frontage on both Lake Michigan

and the Chicago River, a popular walk is from the Loop hotels is across Grant

Park to Lake Michigan, up the Lakefront and then along the Chicago River

walkway and back downtown. Crossing Michigan Avenue is intimidating, but

it is not as intimidating as I-95-Delaware Avenue.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 6 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
    Hence, the underlying goal is not just to remove a pedestrian barrier, but

to create circulation patterns. Accommodating such loops, i.e., the historic

district, along the waterfront, and to South Street nightlife provide

Philadelphia with a unique opportunity in itself. Extension across town to the

Schuylkill is in place already.

   The premise of this project is that large scale building at Penn’s Landing

for private concessions will not be done. This has been the prevailing theory

for a decade, and the last iteration has failed. Rather, the assumption is that

Penn’s Landing will be an open park, perhaps with scattered permanent

attractions such as the Baltimore or Chicago museums, but will primarily be

open, or with muted attractions such as band shells. The assumption is that

Penn’s Landing would form another large public gathering area like the

Benjamin Franklin Parkway.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 7 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Problem Summary


      Our Delaware River waterfront has this potential and is not being

utilized properly. The current usage of nightclubs and commercial shopping

up and down Columbus Boulevard is acceptable, but there is an obvious

potential for something much more. The problem that Philadelphia faces is

there is no obvious connection between the excitement of the old city and

South Street areas to the waterfront.       People come to the end of South

Street and walk out to a bridge overlooking I-95 that ends nowhere. There

they are left hanging out looking at Columbus Boulevard, with perhaps

intentions to go down to the waterfront, but there is no means of getting

there unless you walk down several flights of stairs, in which you get

dropped into a parking lot and have to cross various lanes of traffic. That is

not appealing to locals or tourists.

      If the current infrastructure were to stay in place, the public would

continue to ignore the in-place footbridges and in turn avoid Penn’s Landing.

If coming from anywhere in between South Street and Market Street there is

no convenient way to travel by foot to the waterfront. The current footbridge

system is not adequate if Philadelphia wants to have a successful waterfront.

      Another problem is the fact that Penn’s Landing is not a very handicap

accessible site. There is only one way down to waterfront elevation, and that

is at the Market Street Bridge. It is important that we provide means for the

handicap to take advantage of the waterfront activities with a reasonable

means of transporting pedestrians in a short amount of time.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 8 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
      It is well known that circulation is an important issue. People do not

like to feel as if they are walking far distances or changing elevation. Our

existing connections do not appease the common pedestrian’s wants and

needs.   It is our mission to rid Philadelphia’s Penn’s Landing of circulation

flow problems, and create an atmosphere that is appeasing to tourist while

still maintaining a project that may serve for the future development of the

city’s waterfront.

      In concluding it is very important that in order to further develop the

waterfront area of the city of Philadelphia we will need to connect the city

back to the waterfront area. This will be solved with increased efficiency of

pedestrian travel with the use of decking over Interstate 95.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 9 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Solution

      I-95 creates a barrier between Philadelphia’s Center City and Penn’s

Landing.   Pedestrian access to Penn’s Landing is limited to the bridges

located on Market, Chestnut, Walnut, Spruce, Dock and South Streets. I-95

has been completely covered with concrete decking at Chestnut, Dock and

Spruce Streets and public parks have been created in these areas.         These

areas also allow uninhibited pedestrian access to Penn’s Landing from the

city; however, we feel that a more accessible system is needed. Connecting

Penn’s Landing to the city will provide developers with what has been missing

in the past, a pedestrian connection from the city.

      Developing Penn’s Landing will provide more tourist attractions and

revenue for the city.   With the revitalization of the waterfronts in Camden

and Philadelphia, the two cities can share and profit from the numerous

visitors the attractions will draw to the area.         These attractions could

include, the tram between Penn’s Landing and Camden (in-progress

construction project), a renovated amphitheatre with more attractive events,

the relocation of the existing RiverRink to the Penn’s Landing area, riverboat

gaming to attract visitors that frequent Atlantic City, shopping and

restaurants.

      We propose to cover Interstate 95 and Columbus Blvd. from Chestnut

Street to Walnut Street with new concrete decking. The new decking will tie

into existing bridges and decking to create a continuous deck from Chestnut

to Walnut Street allowing unhindered pedestrian access to Penn’s Landing.

The new decking between Chestnut and Walnut will tie into the existing


HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 10 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
amphitheatre and cover the existing parking lot located on Penn’s Landing in

front of the amphitheatre. The parking lot could be used to provide public

parking for visitors and residents.    The amphitheatre was built above the

grade of Penn’s Landing and tying into the amphitheatre will provide a gentle

slope to the decking as opposed to an abrupt change in grade.                  The

appropriate diagram for this can be seen in Appendix A.

      This option will eliminate the need for large stairs and ramps allowing

pedestrians, especially handicapped, elderly, and pedestrians with small

children, easier access to Penn’s Landing.     A minimum clearance of 16’-6”

must be maintained above Columbus Blvd and I-95.                   However, this

requirement can easily be met by matching the height of the existing bridges

and decking. At this time, we believe that wind currents, which blow parallel

to the Delaware River, will provide sufficient natural ventilation.

      The new tram station will be located between Market and Chestnut

Streets and could be built atop a new 700-car garage. However, the tram

construction has been postponed until the future of Penn’s Landing has been

decided.   We propose a second phase to our project in which the City of

Philadelphia will undertake.   Phase two will provide new decking over I-95

between Chestnuts Streets and the proposed tram station. This new decking

will provide a pedestrian path from the tram station to the decking

connecting Penn’s Landing and Front Street.         We also propose that the

existing amphitheatre be renovated as part of phase two.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104      Page 11 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Pedestrian Circulation Study

      Circulation issues, such as accessibility through the site to locate and

identify destinations and routes were critical to our design. Another major

issue involved the atmosphere of the Penn’s Landing area, including the

feeling of safety, the surrounding of green space, and the presence of

aesthetic features in creating a relaxing environment for families, visitors,

and locals to enjoy.

      Major pedestrian circulation routes should be fairly straight, flat and

smooth. They should be wide enough to accommodate wheelchairs alongside

of pedestrians. The path should be linked directly to the area of final

destination and be clearly lighted at night. A good path would have visibility

of the destination of intent; you would also have a line of sight of landmarks

to help with orientation.

      The design we have chosen fulfills requirements for major pedestrian

circulation routes. Our paths are slightly curved when looking at a plan view

although while walking on them, they will feel as if they are almost

completely straight.   There will be a slight change in grade but the

pedestrian will not notice while walking the path. The path will be linked

directly to Penn’s Landing allowing a great view of the area alluring the

pedestrians to flow to the river front.

      The current pedestrian circulation in the old city area, extending to

Penn’s Landing is congested and unpractical. The congestion forms around

the subway entrances and the few existing pedestrian bridges. The current

flow of pedestrians over the bridges is minimal. This is due to the grade


HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 12 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
change which makes the connection between Front Street and Penn’s

Landing unpractical. To better understand the circulation of current

pedestrian flow, please see Appendix A1.

      When the proposed decking is in place the current circulation will

become stream lined. This will create an open atmosphere and encourage

more people to cross over to the waterfront area. The new decking will have

wider paths and pedestrians will feel secure with I-95 and Columbus Blvd.

out of sight. The direct paths to Penn’s Landing will attract people to the

waterfront, enabling this area to become more productive. Please see

Appendix A2 for a better view of the stream lined circulation pattern that will

be created by the new decking.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 13 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Architectural Solution

      The architectural solution to this problem is a very important part of

the project.     If a solution is picked with little consideration to the

expandability of future projects, and flexibility in use, then it will be

considered a failure. A main objective of the architectural solution will be to

expand the amphitheater and provide adequate access to the deck with large

open areas. Tying into the existing park will also be a critical feature of the

solution.

      Trees can be planted in movable planters and large open grass fields

will be provided in ten inches of top soil. There will be a main access road

down the middle of the deck for emergency access, the structural design will

consider this and size beams appropriately. Along the main access road will

be an area for small structures to stand, which may provide anything to suit

the City’s needs. Utilities chases will be provided in this area, with access to

water, electricity, storm water and telephone. These chases will run through

continuous box beams, and will have flexibility because of the many access

points along the main road that can be tapped.

      Two side access sidewalks have been provided, and serve as a more

direct alternative to the existing pedestrian bridges at Chestnut and Walnut

Streets. These two paths lead into a great open area, which will serve as an

extension of the amphitheater.     With the growth of the amphitheater size,

Philadelphia will be provided with a larger area to hold public events.

Overall, the architectural solution we have designed is flexible in use, and will

serve the City well, please refer to Appendix B for diagrams.


HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 14 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
      A major concern of HEGY’s was to provide access to the lower-level

parking that is located next to Columbus Boulevard. While enclosing the lot,

it was in our scope to ensure that vehicles that parked in this area still had

clear access to the amphitheater.     To our satisfaction, there is an existing

gate located on the current amphitheater that provides access down to the

parking lot; therefore we will not need to consider any further action to

provide access.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 15 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Structural Solution

      In order to design the structural support system for the deck we first

need to establish some basic project constraints and criteria. The first is the

overall dimension of the deck. We need to know the size and minimum

roadway clearances of the deck before we can start to design any supports.

Next the structural system will need to provide adequate capacity for dead,

live, wind, and snow loads. It will also need to have an adequate drainage

system since it will be collecting large amounts of water due to rainfall. Also

there typically would be a limit placed on the length of structural members

because of the difficulty to deliver them to the site. Since our site is located

on the Delaware River, we will be able to ship any length member to it with

no problem such as the turning radius of a truck.

      The next step we take in the design of columns and beams for our

structure will be to get a rough estimate of the dead and live loads that will

be placed on the structure. The first thing we will consider is the dead load.

The dead load will be governed by the types of cover that will be placed on

the structure. For the areas that are designated to be covered by grass, we

will place a layer of topsoil down. This is followed by a thin layer of sand or

gravel. These materials are highly porous and will help transfer water to the

drainage system. We will need to contain the sand and gravel with an

impermeable geomembrane. This will prevent the material from washing

away which will cause a major problem. The areas that will be designated

walkways, we can simply place black top right on our structural deck.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 16 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
      Each of these materials has a unit weight that we can use to determine

how much each will weigh per linear foot. The total dead load on this

structure will be 2329 lbs/ft. This includes the self weight of the beam. The

specifics of these calculations can also be seen in Appendix C1.

      We are designing the deck to be used by pedestrians only with a strip

to be used as an emergency access and location for small food trucks and

light structures. AASHTO H20 loading conditions will be used for this access

strip. Since our site is located in Philadelphia we will also be considering

snow loading. In this area the typical load used is 30 psf. When we add

these together we get the total live load to be 130psf.

      Now that we have the loads that will be placed on the structure we can

start getting the dimensions of the deck. The deck will be approximately 536

ft. wide and have a length of 309 ft. We also need to know the width of both

I-95 and Columbus Boulevard because the deck will be spanning both of

these roadways. The minimum clearance for these roadways will be 18.5 ft.

These are just a few of the dimensions we need established before we can

continue the structural design. You can see a full, more detailed view of our

dimensions from Appendix C2.

      After establishing basic dimensions and loads for our deck, we can now

check to see if any existing structures will be able to be incorporated into the

design of our structural system. The first thing we noticed was the existing

cover that spans I-95. This cover is presently used as a small recreational

area with various types of vegetation located on it. This is similar to what we

are creating so we can extend this structure 170 ft. south and use it in our



HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 17 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
support system. This structure is a concrete deck sitting on continuous

concrete beams which sit on a 3 foot wide reinforced concrete bearing wall.

This will work well for spanning over both north and south bound lanes of I-

95 and the two on ramps in this area. The next structure we noticed was the

Chestnut Street Bridge. We cannot use this structure in our design so we will

mesh our deck up against the bridge in order to make our structure highly

accessible to pedestrians. The last existing structure we are going to use is

the Amphitheater. This will be the final connection for our deck. We are

going to connect into this structure because it is already at grade with our

deck and this will bring pedestrians to the final location of Penn’s Landing.

      The next section we needed to design was over Columbus Boulevard

and the existing parking lot. Columbus Boulevard is approximately 130 ft.

wide curb to curb including the median. This is a long span for a single beam

so we need to break it up. There is a section of the median next to the rail

road track that is 11 ft. wide. We can use this area to place a column line so

we can break up the long span to 78.5 ft. and 74 ft. We can also split up the

parking area with the same dimension of 74 ft.

      Now that we have determined the distances we need to span we can

start to decide on the type of columns and beams we will use to support the

deck. When choosing the column type we need to satisfy specific criteria

pertaining to our project. First we need to have ample spacing between

columns to allow for vehicular traffic to pass through freely. In order to

accomplish this we have chosen to space our columns at 24 ft. on center.

This will also allow for plenty of parking space between columns. Next we



HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 18 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
will need each column to be able to support 1455 kips of axial load. They will

also need to be reinforced in order to resist bending about either axis. Each

column will also need to be extremely durable since they will be exposed to

the elements. The columns will also need to have ample seating surface.

This will be necessary because the beams will need to be continuous to span

such a long distance and support heavy loads.

      We also need to set criteria for the beams that we use in this project.

The beams we use will need to have a large strength to weight ratio. We

need to maximize this because we will be spanning large lengths. Each

beam will need to be capable of supporting a combined dead and live load of

430 psf. To keep deflection to a minimum, the beam needs to withstand a

factored moment of 3150 ft – kips. Similar to the columns, some of the

faces of the beams will be exposed to the elements and therefore they will

also need to be durable.

      Given all these parameters we have chosen a structural system made

entirely of concrete. We are going to use cast-in-place concrete columns

that are 4 ft. square. They will be 12 ft. tall with a hammerhead cap cast-in-

place on top of each column. The beams we will use are pre-cast pre-

stressed concrete box beams. They will be 4 ft. wide by 4.5 ft. deep. The

beams will be cast using three standard lengths. Those lengths will be

104.25, 80.167, and 74 feet.

      The emergency access section will not need to be specially designed as

we previously thought. All the beams that will be involved in supporting the

emergency access road will use a higher strength concrete, around 8,000 psi.



HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 19 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Per our visit to Schuylkill Products, the head engineer informed us that this

will provide significant support for any vehicles that need to cross the deck.

In the area where only pedestrians are allowed, we will be using a live load

of 100 psf. 4,000 psi concrete will suffice in these areas since the loads will

be smaller.

      Now that we know what our structure looks like and all the loads have

been determined, we need to devise a system to provide support. This will

be relatively easy because our foundation system is already dictated to us by

the poor soil conditions. The soil we are building on is a very wet and soft

clay mixed with some sand and fill. This will never provide adequate bearing

capacity for our structure so we need to choose a foundation system.

      We chose a deep foundation system called drilled shafts. The shaft

will be 4 ft. in diameter and augured down to depths of about 25 - 30 feet, or

until we hit bedrock. There will be one shaft per column so we will need to

be extremely careful during drilling we are on target with the specific location

of each column. Once we hit bedrock, reinforcing steel will be placed in the

hole and the shaft will be pumped full of high strength low slump concrete.

This will easily support the weight of our structure. We will also be relying on

the massive weight of the structure to resist any uplift loads. For a detailed

look of what our structural system looks like, you can refer to Appendices C1

through C4.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 20 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Utilities

       One of the main concerns while designing the new decking is locating

existing utilities around the Penn’s Landing area. Most of the existing utilities

were located running North and South underneath Columbus Blvd. and an

existing service road.    All of the utilities required for our new deck are

located very close to the site. This will save construction time and money

because long utility duct banks will not have to be installed. Connections to

the existing utilities will need to be made beneath Columbus Blvd., which will

interrupt the current traffic flow. The following utilities were located beneath

Columbus Blvd. and the service road, and are also diagramed in Appendix

D1:

Columbus Blvd:

      8” Water
      2 - 12” Water
      30” RCP Stormwater
      Lighting Conduit
      5” PVC Comcast CATV Conduit
      22” x 16” PECO duct bank
      7” 66,000 volt PECO
      2” PECO PDT
      2” PECO

The following utilities were located beneath the existing service road:

      2-12” Water
      15” Sanitary Sewer
      16”x 10” PECO duct bank
      12” x 16” Verizon duct bank

       Our decking has been designed to contain four types of utilities and

will include electricity, telephone, storm water, and city water into our

design.     The electricity was originally to be connected to the 66,000 volt

PECO main.      However, a large substation would be required to step the

HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 21 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
66,000 volts down to a useable voltage. A large substation is not feasible for

this project and would substantially increase costs, while taking up large

amounts of space.       A 480/277 volt 3 phase electrical service will be

purchased directly from PECO to power street lighting along the decking. A

Square D, 75 KVA, dry-type transformer will be used to step the 480-volt

down to 120-volt service for standard equipment and outlets, which you can

see in Appendix D2.      8” galvanized steel conduit will be used to supply

electricity to the decking. A connection will need to be made to one of the

12” water lines to supply water to the new decking. Water will be needed for

fire hydrants, lawn sprinklers and drinking fountains and will be provided by

8” ductile iron piping. Telephone lines will be provided to the new decking

for emergency purposes. Runoff will be collected by the deck’s storm water

sewers and will be connected to the existing combined sewer beneath Penn’s

Landing. The pipes that have been selected for storm water collection are

12” PVC for the branch runs and 15” PVC for the main storm water piping.

PVC pipe was selected over steel piping because of the ease of installation

and also because it is very lightweight and durable.

      Connections to the existing utilities will made below Columbus Blvd.

and the utilities will continue run underground until they reach a structural

column and will be installed on the surface of the column and run vertically

to reach the utility chase. The utilities will be supplied to the decking through

a utility chase that will be located inside one of the central box beams. The

piping will be held in a vertical position inside the box beam by steel pipe

racks to allow workers more room to install and service the utilities.       The



HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 22 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
pipe racks selected will be constructed of U-shaped pipe supports welded to

an I-beam and will be fabricated on site. You can see an example of this in

Appendix D2. These will be installed approximately every 15-20 feet inside

of the utility chase.   The utility chase will be accessed through manholes

located on the surface of the decking.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 23 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Construction Schedule

      A major objective of this term has been to identify a schedule to

complete this project with.     We have chosen to build this project in one

year’s time.   Given the assurance from Schuylkill Products that this is a

feasible time frame, the following schedule has been created. We have first

scheduled the demolition and excavation of the site, which runs with the

obtaining of the proper permits. From here the shaft footings are drilled and

set, and the piers are placed along with the hammerhead column heads.

After this has taken place the box beams are installed, after the main runs

for the utilities have been installed. After the beams are in place, they are

caulked and grouted and a geomembrane material is put in place. From here

the sidewalks and pathways are put into place, and the installation of the

mechanical equipment and final installation of utilities and connections are

made. Then the soil is placed and seeding and planting finalizes the project.

The schedule in Appendix E provides a visual for this plan.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 24 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Tasks Accomplished

      In the Spring Term of the 2003 academic year, HEGY Engineering

continued to enhance the construction designs.       We took time to also visit

pre-cast concrete supplier, Schuylkill Products, to inquire about the purchase

of box beams.    Further consideration and design of the emergency access

support and foundation system was accomplished, along with finalized design

of utilities chases. Construction schedules, and a more specific construction

cost summary was presented.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 25 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Team History

      The HEGY engineering team is comprised of Regina Esposito, Chris

Gee, Bryan Haag and Adam Yuhas.          All four engineers all graduated from

Drexel University receiving various engineering degrees in the Civil &

Architectural disciplines.   Regina and Adam have two degrees from the

University, one in architectural engineering and another in civil engineering.

They both focused on the structural engineering track of the two degrees.

Chris has two degrees from the University, one in architectural engineering

and another in civil engineering.        In addition to his concentration in

mechanical engineering, he also found time to receive a minor in business

administration. Bryan received a degree in architectural engineering with a

focus in the mechanical aspects of building systems engineering.

      Regina Esposito has a background in business entrepreneurship. She

worked within her father’s chocolate factory since age thirteen and has

various experiences in purchasing and marketing. She spent her first co-op

job with the Norwood Company based in Bethlem, Pennsylvania.                She

received a solid background in general construction and was familiarized with

the construction process. Her last two co-ops were spent with E.I. DuPont,

learning yet another business and its operations.           She worked in the

engineering group as a project engineer on process application jobs. Upon

graduation of the university, she took a field engineering position with E.I.

DuPont and spent several years becoming familiar with the industries

movements.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 26 of 44
                                                      HEGY Engineering
                                                     Building A Better Tomorrow
        Bryan Haag began his interest in construction as a young man hanging

drywall and framing houses with a local construction company. He took his

first   co-op   with   the   Philadelphia   International Airport   working   as   a

commercial construction inspector. He was employed by Entech Engineering,

an engineering firm out of Reading, Pennsylvania. He worked as a facilities

system analyst conducting studies on mechanical and architectural systems

and advising recommendations for future work.             After graduation, Bryan

began working fulltime with Entech, accepting a position in the mechanical

design department. Bryan has gained several years of valuable mechanical

engineering experience.

        Chris Gee began his career with a position at Cagley, Harman &

Associates.     He performed engineering design work and investigations of

building structural systems.        He then moved into the biotech industry

working with ORTHOVITA Inc. where he designed and modeled standardized

spine testing fixtures.      He also headed up a project on the design of a

bioactive load bearing material with his imperative research and design skills.

Chris continued his experience with Integrated Project Services. There he

worked as a design engineer in the mechanical department, implementing

the design of mechanical, plumbing and process engineering projects. After

completion of his education Chris accepted a field engineering position with

Sunoco, Inc. and spent several years gaining quality engineering and

management experience.

        Adam Yuhas grew up working in landscaping and construction in the

small town of Hazleton, PA. He took his first co-op with Norwood, a general



HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104     Page 27 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
construction company supervising construction. He spent his next co-op with

Site Blauvelt Engineers and was a field supervisor there as well. He took his

last co-op with Alfred Benish and Company heading a surveying team. He

graduated from Drexel University and moved back to Hazelton, Pa, where he

was employed by the city’s engineering group.

      Regina, Bryan, Chris and Adam were reunited five years after

graduation forming the HEGY Engineering Group.          Based on their various

backgrounds in engineering they decided to diversify their interests, taking

on urban planning projects in Philadelphia, the city of their Alma Madder.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 28 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Spring Term Schedule




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 29 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Budget
         The total cost of the project is going to be the sum of the construction
and engineering fees. To determine the construction cost we have received
quotes from different contractors and have tabulated labor and material
costs.     We have received an official pricing tabulation from Schuylkill
Products which is included in Appendix F1. The table of all construction costs
can be seen in Appendix F2. The sum of all construction costs is .
         Next we determine the engineering fee which is quite simple to
calculate. We take the going rate for design multiply this by the man hours
and get a total cost. A detailed calculation for this cost will be worked out
below.


10 hours/week/person x 33 weeks x 4 persons = 1320 hours
1 - Project Manager - $120/hour
1 - Design Manager - $120/hour
1 - Project Engineer - $90/hour
1 - Design Engineer - $90/hour
Total Rate = (2 x 120) + (2 x 90) = $420/hour
Total Engineering Fee = $420/hour x 1320 hours = $555,000


Now that we determined the engineering fee and the total construction cost,
we simply add the two and that is our total cost for the entire project.


Total Project Cost = $10,293,698 + $555,000
Total Project Cost = $ 10.9 Million




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 30 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
References

Digital Images & Research Content

Penn’s Landing Special Package. Philadelphia Inquirer. October 2002.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/special_packages/penns_landing/



City of Philadelphia Interviews Conducted with

Darin L. Gatti, P.E. – Engineer of Design

James A. Gabriele – Bridge Engineer



Structural Engineering Consulting Provided by Pennoni Associates Inc.

Daniel S. DiMucci, RLA, ASLA – Vice President

Harry E. Laspee, P.E.



Gantt Chart Time Table Provided by Professor James E. Mitchell

http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~mitcheje



Mechanical Engineering Consulting Provided by Entech Engineering Inc.

John Divelbiss, P.E

Phil Kershner, P.E.




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 31 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix A1 – Diagram of Penn’s Landing Existing Circulation




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 32 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix A2 – Diagram of Penn’s Landing Future Circulation




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 33 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix B – Architectural




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 34 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 35 of 44
                                                                        HEGY Engineering
                                                                       Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix C1 – Structural




                       Walkways                                                  Grassy Areas
              Unit                                                           Unit
             Weight       Depth        Width       Load                     Weight    Depth   Width      Load
  Material    (pcf)                                              Material    (pcf)
                           (ft)         (ft)      (lbs/ft)                             (ft)    (ft)     (lbs/ft)
 Blacktop        140      0.1667         4        93.333           Soil       120     0.833     4        400
   Base          135       0.75          4         405            Sand        140     0.167     4         93
 Geotext          2          -           4           8           Geotext       2        -       4          8
                                        Total                                                  Total
                                           =       507                                            =      501

                 Load     Width           W
   Type
                 (psf)     (ft)        (lbs/ft)
    Live         100        4           400
   Snow           30        4           120
   Dead            -        -           507
Weightbeam         -        -           525                  W u = 1.4 x (D.L. + Weight of beam) + 1.7 x L.L.
                           Wu =         2329

Load per column = (104 ft x 2330 lbs/ft) x 6 beams = 1455 kips

             2                     2
Mu = (W u x ln )/8 = (2329 x 104 )/8
Mu = 3150 ft - kips




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104                           Page 36 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix C2 – Structural




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 37 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix C3 – Structural




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 38 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix C4 – Structural




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 39 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix D1 – Utilities




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 40 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix D2 – Transformer and Pipe Supports




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 41 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix E – Construction Schedule




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 42 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix F1 – Box Beam Quote




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104   Page 43 of 44
                                                    HEGY Engineering
                                                   Building A Better Tomorrow
Appendix F2 – Construction Costs


           Material             Quote          Total Cost for Project
    Composite Box Beam           LS                 $5,398,400
         Excavations            $55/cy               $272,415
      Class A Concrete         $230/cy              $2,981,160
     Class AA Concrete         $280/cy               $317,520
            Rebar              $0.65/lb               $95,000
       Geo-membrane            $0.30/sf               $40,500
      Blacktop Surface          $8/sf                $102,912
      Piping Installation         -                   $75,000
        Pipe Supports             -                   $5,000
    Storm Water Collectors        -                   $18,000
      Utility Connections         -                   $25,000
         Transformer              -                   $5,000
            Wiring                -                   $22,000
   Overhead & Profit (10%)        -                  $935,791
                                   Total =         $10,293,698




HEGY Engineering | 3141 Chestnut Street | Philadelphia, PA 19104        Page 44 of 44

								
To top