Pioneering Engineering, LLC.

ENCE 466 - Design of Civil Engineering

Systems

Professor Russell Anderson

Fall Semester, 2020

University of Maryland

19 December 2020
Table of Contents

Table of Contents 2

Team Overview 5

Project Description 9

Existing Site Conditions and Proposed Site Improvements 13

Overview of Existing Site 13
Existing Conditions Drawing 13
Land Use 14
Constraints 15
Travel Patterns 17
Utilities 18
Storm Drains 19
Hydrology 20
Hydrologic Points of Interest 22

Proposed Site Plan 23

Proposed Site Plan Drawing 23
Transportation Network 24
Roof Plans 27
Utility Modifications 27
Utility Site Plan 27
Utility Demolition 27
Utility Connections 28
Limit of Disturbance 33
Land Use and ESDv 34
Stormwater Management 35
Relocated Athletic Field 39
Improvements to the “M” 40
Benefits and Shortcomings 41
Mid-semester Changes 41

Transportation - Related Design 43

Role of Transit in the Area 43
Criteria for each Roadway 43
Figure 38: Vehicle Pattern Changes 45
Traffic Analysis 48
 Detour Plan 49

Student Services Building 50

Sustainability 66

Parking Garage 72

Pavement Design 86
Pavement Plan 86
Flexible Pavement Calculations 87
Sections of Pavements 88

Construction Methodology 90

Cost Estimate and Schedule 92

Stakeholder and Public Involvement Plan 95

Summary and Conclusion 98

List of Sources 99

3
 Pioneering Engineering, LLC.

At Pioneer Engineering, our number one priority is the safety of the public. We’re not
afraid to try new and innovative ways to solve problems. Our engineers are talented individuals
who have a history of solving complex projects.

4
Team Overview

Jules Tchinda is a senior engineering student at the University

of Maryland with a concentration in geotechnical/structural
engineering. He plans on getting his professional license and
Master’s degree in engineering. However, he has decided to
obtain experience in the industry first, to figure out what he
wants to specialize in. Over the past two summers, he has
interned with Milani Construction Llc, where he worked on a
bridge, and Shirley Contracting Company Llc, where he did
transportation work. In his time at those firms, he mainly
focused on project management. He plans to use that experience
to lead his team in delivering a successful project. He has always
been passionate about engineering and feels the need to give
back to society. In his free time, he likes to play soccer, and his favorite team is F.C. Barcelona.
As the project leader, he will be in constant contact with sub-group leaders to guarantee the
project scope finishes on schedule. He will be in charge of planning and give additional input in
infrastructure. Although Jules will be involved in all aspects of the project, his focus will be on
sediment and erosion control, estimating, construction staging, and scheduling.

Rodrigo Ferraz is a senior engineering student at the

University of Maryland. He arrived in the United States in
2018 and started his studies in the summer of the same year.
Coming from Brazil, he brings experience as a mathematics
and physics teacher which is being applied in his current job
as a teacher assistant at the University of Maryland. Coming
from a military family, he understands discipline,
leadership, and group work. On this project, he will focus
on the foundation and transportation working with Melat;
developing documents, organizing deliverables, and will be
in constant communication with Dr. Aggour. Currently, he
lives in Silver Spring, Maryland.

5
 Melat Alemu is a senior civil engineering student at the
University of Maryland focusing on the Structural and
Geo-technical track while also minoring in Project Management.
She was born and raised in Ethiopia in the capital city Addis
Ababa. After two years of attending college in Ethiopia, she
moved to the U.S. in 2015 to pursue her higher education. The
first school she went to after moving to the U.S. was
Montgomery College where she earned her Associate of Science
degree in 2017. In her time at Montgomery College, she was a
member of the Engineers Without Borders Montgomery College
chapter where she contributed to building a library for a school
in a rural area of Panama. After earning her associate’s degree,
she interned at DDOT’s Infrastructure Project Management Division where she worked on
stormwater management and implementation of Green Infrastructure in the district. Melat will be
graduating in Fall 2020 and plans on pursuing her master’s in urban and regional planning in the
near future. For this project, she will be focusing on transportation design where she will be
coordinating with her colleague Rodrigo Ferraz.

William Melendez is a senior civil engineering student at the

University of Maryland concentrating on Structural and
geotechnical engineering. Before coming to UMD he attended
Prince George's Community College where he earned an associate
degree in Engineering. William comes from a Salvadorian family
where construction is the main go-to job. Growing up William
knew he always wanted to be a civil engineer, he loved to design
and build anything he could get his hands on. William has
experience working with AutoCAD and Revit. During this project,
William will be focused on the structural portion of the CAD and
Revit design. William's goals for this project is to work together
with colleagues, Jules Tchinda, and Brian Murphy on the

6
structural analysis part of the design and generate CAD and Revit files.

Brian Murphy brings a well-rounded and diverse experience to

this engineering endeavor, as he is equipped with a few months of
Project Engineering Internship, three years of Civil Engineering
Internship, and over six years of Satellite Communication Systems
experience. He earned an Associates of Science in Fire Science
from Columbia Southern University in 2018 and an Associates of
Science in Engineering from the Community College of Baltimore
County in 2017. While pursuing his associate degree at the
community college, Brian worked for RMF Engineering as a
design engineer intern where he would draft and design
campus-setting energy distribution systems. Noticing he had a keen
interest in collaboration and coordination efforts, Brian turned his
attention to fulfill the role as a project engineer intern with
Whiting-Turner. During his time with Whiting-Turner, he focused
on the review of project procurement documentation. His aspirations take him to further delve
into the field of construction management with Whiting-Turner post-graduation. Currently, he
resides in Columbia, Maryland with his fiancé Katelynn.

Deanna Elmendorf is a senior civil engineering student at

the University of Maryland focusing on water resources
and environmental engineering. She is currently interning
at Straughan Environmental, Inc. where she assists with
major Maryland and Virginia DOT projects as well as
stormwater management, erosion and sediment control,
dam breach analysis, and stream restoration. She enjoys
performing fieldwork that involves soil sampling and
surveying. Personally, she likes spending her time playing
rugby and traveling with her dog, Manny.
Deanna will be working on the stormwater management and sustainability design portion
of this project along with our two other environmental engineers, Max and Alex. Her goal for
this project is to utilize her passion for sustainability to design a resource-conscious building for
the forward-thinking faculty, staff, and students at the University of Maryland.

7
 Alexandra Miller is a senior civil and
environmental engineering student at the
University of Maryland, College Park with a
concentration in water resources and
environmental engineering. Alex has previously
interned with the United States Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), where she
analyzed soil samples of decommissioned sites to
ensure that radionuclides were below the
maximum contaminant levels. She is continuing
her work as a Co-op with the NRC this year. After
graduation in the spring, Alexandra plans to
pursue her interests and obtain a master’s degree in civil and environmental engineering with a
focus on hydrological engineering. Her primary responsibility for this project will focus on the
design of the storm water management systems and the optimization of sustainability features
into the construction plans. She will work closely with Deanna Elmendorf and Max Napolitano,
her fellow environmental engineering colleagues.

Max Napolitano is a fifth-year civil engineering student pursuing a

degree focused on water resource management and environmental
engineering. He has been able to apply these skills to his work with
ACE Services, a general contractor that specializes in water and
wastewater infrastructure in the Mid-Atlantic Region. He
contributed to the construction of Howard County’s Western
Regional Park Wastewater Treatment Plant and is looking forward
to many equally successful projects in the future.
In addition to construction management, Max enjoys backpacking
remote stretches of the country and rock climbing whenever
possible. He is excited about the possibility of using his engineering
background to create sustainable outdoor spaces within this project.

8
Project Description
This project was the brainchild of former UMD president Dr. Wallace Loh. While his
vision has dictated much of the campus development since his appointment in 2010, his recent
departure has left the future of such construction to some interpretation. Some project constraints
include certain aesthetic concerns, such as the historic viewshed and boundary wall, that are
intended to better incorporate the new building into existing campus appeal. However, the visual
aspects of the project design are only a fraction of the work necessary to ensure a safe and
functional building. The technical design components will depend on the expertise of University
of Maryland professors and the practical experience of this course’s own Russ Anderson. This
project is being designed in parallel with the future Purple Line development, so this and all
Route One development plans must be considered to make this construction “future-proof.” In
addition to these, the outside sources needed for reference are sure to increase as the complexity
of the project is revealed.
This project requires members from the three tracks housed within the Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering to collaborate to complete a design for the University of
Maryland, College Park. The project will be located in College Park, just northeast of
Washington DC (see figure 1-1).

Figure 1-1: Project Location Aerial View

9
More precisely, the project will take place at the Engineering Fields, located in front of the Hotel
UMD. The existing main road access to the project is route 1 as seen in figure 1-2.

Figure 1-2: Closer View on the Project Location

The main component of the design is a new student services building, however,
supplemental structures are also required such as a parking garage, and an elevated surface near
the new ‘M’ circle. Each of these structures has certain requirements that must be met to
optimize their functionality. The location of this new student services building must be located
in between Turner Hall and the Engineering Fields. If necessary some of the engineering athletic
field can be taken to construct the building, however, the regulation size soccer and rugby fields
currently there must be relocated. In addition to these building requirements, other elements must
be taken into account for this project. A parking garage must be designed to account for the
parking spaces that are going to be lost due to construction. This parking garage must contain all
of the parking spaces that are currently within the two parking lots near the proposed
construction site, as well as an additional 50 parking spots for the retail shops going in the new
student services building. This parking garage can not be permit parking, and therefore can only
be a visitor or short-term parking.

10
 Figure 2: Project Buildings Requirement

A total of 19 bike-share stations must be located close to this new parking garage. All
sidewalks in the front have to be at least 10 feet wide and eight feet wide in all other locations.
An elevated surface near the new ‘M’ circle must also be constructed for people to take better
pictures in front of the circle. The design of this project must be detailed in site plans, using
computer software such as CADD. The site plan must show the layout and location of the
structures, sidewalks, roads, transit stops, parking, stormwater management facilities, bicycle
facilities, and any other amenities or features being implemented in the design. In addition to
fulfilling the project requirements, the overall design and plan must provide improvements in:
● Safety: the introduction of new lighting and emergency call stations everywhere
around the site will make it safer for individuals at night and during the day.
● Mobility: the design will include a parking garage, bike stations, bus stops, all
extremely close to the student services building. Not only that, the roadway access
and exit make it easy for commuters. Additionally, there will sidewalks, around
the buildings, and across the site for Pedestrians.
● Environmental stewardship: The design is set to promote a sustainable
environment with several Bioretention cells, trees, solar panels, and a green roof.
● Livability: This will be a new way for students to socialize, as well as provide an
alternative outlet to the STAMP Student Union for those living near the area

11
 ● Economic development: This project should add value to the University of
Maryland and the new stores in place are ways to bring in revenue.

Major Constraints
This student services building project must heed to physical, financial, and time
constraints. First, the available building space is constrained by the historic viewshed. This
viewshed runs from the Founder’s Gate to the Chapel steeple across the soccer field in which the
building site resides. This viewshed must be preserved so this likely means that the design will
use the viewshed as a boundary for the building. On the opposing side of the viewshed, the site is
constrained by US-1 and the historic brick wall that runs from the Founder’s Gate. The project
requires retail storefronts on US-1 so the building must be placed close enough to US-1 but also
must be 25 feet from the wall. It is permitted, however, to create a maximum of two 10 ft breaks
in the wall if necessary. On the south side of the site, a parking lot borders the soccer field. This
is a constraint as it is likely that the parking garage is best placed here. For the best design, the
parking garage should not exceed the size of the parking lot. Consequently, if the parking garage
is built on the existing parking lot, then the student services building can not be built on the
parking lot. The last notable physical constraint is the existing utilities that run under the site.
There is a steam and condensate line that could either be relocated or avoided.
Moving utilities call for the consideration of financial constraints. This project design
prioritizes meeting the project requirements for the lowest possible cost. This means minimizing
the footprint, maximizing the height of the building, and designing the parking garage to meet,
not exceed the requirements. A budget considers the best use of materials and labor. Lastly, many
other projects are occurring around the building site. As a result, this project has time constraints
that must be coordinated with timelines of neighboring projects, such as the Purple Line.

Figure 3: Project Area

12
Existing Site Conditions and Proposed Site Improvements

Overview of Existing Site

Existing Conditions Drawing

Figure 4: Existing Conditions Plan CAD Drawing

13
 Land Use

The majority of the current site is dominated by the University of Maryland’s

Engineering Fields. These 8 acres of Bermuda base grassy area is located on Baltimore Avenue
between Turner Hall and North Gate Entrance, the fields offer a softball field and multi-use
fields that accommodate club sports activities such as soccer, rugby, and ultimate frisbee. This
area is considered the “Front Lawn” of the University and is between the main entrance to the
campus and the administration buildings housing the President’s offices and the Student Affairs
Administrative office. These fields are accessible to the public unless reserved by a group
through the University Recreation and Wellness organization. The University Recreation and
Wellness establishes the rules and regulations for those using the field to promote a safe and
pleasurable creation experience for everyone. Additionally, these fields are often utilized by the
intramural and club sports programs from the University and immediate area.

Figure 5: Image of Engineering Fields standing at “M” looking East

The M Circle was originally created in 1976 in the traffic circle at the intersection of
Campus and Regents drives. The campus planned to construct a bicentennial landmark at the
traffic circle, once considered an eyesore, with the horticulture department who provided the
plants. The physical plant elevated the upper portion of the circle by nine feet in order to make
the red and white pansy laden, 33 feet wide, and the 34-foot long gothic letter M visible to
display from route 1. Due to the proposed alignment of the new segment to the metro, the Purple
line Project caused a recent move to the M onto the Mitchell Building’s front lawn as shown in
figure 6.

14
 Figure 6: The new “M” in front of the Old “M” Circle

Turner Hall and Parking Lots

Turner Hall was the first home of UMD’s ice cream manufacturing in 1924. It
now serves the campus as a visitor center and administrative building. The two parking lots that
lie between Mitchell Building and Turner Hall hold approximately 120 parking spaces each.

Figure 7: (A) Aerial Image of Turner Hall, (B) Parking Lots between Mitchell Building and Turner Hall

Constraints

Throughout the design of this project, the design team had to take a few considerations
into account that “constrained” the proposed design from its full potential. First, the project
scope must include improvements to UMD’s new “M”, reference figure 8(A), and that the
proposed relocation of the sporting fields or proposed building could not, in essence, relocate the
“M” again. Secondly, there is a historic viewshed from UMD’s Founders Gate, the main entrance
to campus from the intersection of campus dr. and route 1. This historic viewshed, as seen in
figure 8(B), can not be obstructed by the proposed building or parking garage. Along UMD’s
campus exists a brick perimeter wall, refer to figure 8(C), that must be disturbed minimally.

15
Work to the brick wall is limited to two new pedestrian entrances which cannot exceed 10 ft
breaks each. As seen in figure 8(D), there exists an existing in-service steam vault within the
project site. It is located just north of the north-east corner of the Turner Hall parking lot. This
steam vault must be avoided so that the existing steam lines can remain in-service.

The Purple Line Project is the 16-mile light rail line project that is connecting Bethesda
and New Carrollton which passes through UMD’s Campus. Construction has already started on
the project, preparations/construction has already taken place on UMD’s Campus. Unfortunately,
there has been some political mess with the Purple Line Project whereas, the Purple Line Transit
Partners, LLC quit the job after cost disputes with the state. The state has committed to pick up
the project; however, the resume date of construction is yet to be determined. Since the purple
line has already designed and began construction… we are committed to minimizing any
changes to their existing design/plans. The purple line will expand Rossborough lane into a
substantial road on this part of campus. The Lane and Purple Line will cut through the parking
lot which we intend to return to grassy areas. We will utilize their proposed entrance to the
existing parking lot/ our proposed parking garage. Figure 8(E) displays the alignment of the
purple line project and major improvements to Rossborough lane.

Figure 8: (A) “M” Circle, (B) Historic Viewshed, (C) UMD Brick Wall, (D) Steam Vault, (E) Purple Line
Construction

16
 Travel Patterns
The existing traffic circulation is limited to automobiles, pedestrians, and bikes. Before the
improvements, which will be made by MDOT, the area does not have exclusive bike lanes or
bike racks along Route 1. Since we have engineering fields as an open space, it is common to see
people crossing it to go to Turner Lab. The traffic circulation before the improvements is shown
in the picture below.

Figure 9: Existing Traffic Circulation

After the improvement on Route 1 in addition to the use of the Purple Line, we are
expecting more pedestrians in the region. Moreover, exclusive bike lanes will be added, hence
the volume of users might increase as expected. Also, our parking garage will have one entrance
on Route 1 near our building, however, the volume of the automobiles is not so big that will
impact the travel pattern. The Purple Line will bring an additional volume of traffic to the
intersection of Route 1 with Rossborough Lane. The expected new traffic pattern is shown in the
figure below.

17
Figure 10: New Traffic Pattern

Utilities
There is a substantial network of existing steam lines throughout the project site. There is
a line of 14” Steam, 14” Abandoned Steam, and 10” Condensate lines that run through the
footprint of our proposed building. Our intent is to remove most of these legs of steam/ abandon
a portion and reroute the lines needed to service existing buildings. There are existing in-service
steam lines that we will protect that will lie in-between our proposed building and Parking
Garage. There is an existing storm line running parallel and inside of the brick wall along the
U.S. Route 1. There is existing telecom, Gas, and Water running on the west side of US 1. There
are existing telecom and sanitary sewer across US 1. Lastly, note there is some site lighting that
will need to be removed at the parking lot.

18
 Figure 11: Aerial View of Existing Underground Utilities

Storm Drains
The existing site runoff flows into surrounding existing inlets along Route 1 and Campus
Drive. In Figure 12, the six inlets of interest are indicated in yellow and the storm drain system
marked in red. The inflow to these inlets eventually outfalls into Paint Branch north of the site
where Paint Branch crosses under Route 1 on the upstream side. The outfall drains into Paint
Branch with no rip rap or protection and does not need rehabilitating.

19
 Figure 12: Existing storm drain system (red) and inlets (red)

Hydrology

The area confined by the site LOD is 4.61 acres. Of this, 1.45 acres is impervious
and 3.16 acres is pervious. The impervious area consists of sidewalks and parking lots. The LOD
and land use delineations can be seen in Figure 13.

Figure 13: LOD and impervious area delineation

20
 The site hydrologic soil groups are C and D. Soil group C consists of the field area and is
characterized as sandy loam with a 2 to 5 percent slope. Soil group D consists of the parking lot
and the edges of the field and is characterized as an urban land woodstown complex with 0 to 5
percent slope. The soil group delineation is below in Figure 14.

Figure 14: Hydrologic Soil Group delineation

Soil group C has a curve number of 74, group D has a curve number of 80, and the
impervious area has a curve number of 95. Hydrologic soil group C is 2.86 acres, group D is 0.31
acres, and impervious area 1.45 acres. The weighted runoff curve number calculations, shown in
Table 1, result in a RCN of 82.

Table 1: Weighted Runoff Curve Number Calculations

Land Use/Soil CN Area (ac) CN*Area

Open Space, HSG C,

74.0 2.86 211.6
good condition

Open Space, HSG D,

80.0 0.31 25.0
good condition

Impervious, All soil

98.0 1.45 141.9
types
Total --- 4.62 378.5
Weighted CN= 81.9

21
 Use CN = 82

Hydrologic Points of Interest

The six inlets that receive drainage from the site are indicated by colored circles and their
respective drainage areas in Figure 15. A majority of the drainage is marked by the green area
and the parking lot drainage is indicated by the red area.

Figure 15: Hydrologic Points of Interest and Relative Drainage Areas

22
Proposed Site Plan

Proposed Site Plan Drawing

Figure 16: Proposed Site Plan CAD Drawing

The proposed building has a footprint of 40,000 square feet with the length side running
parallel with U.S. Route 1. Immediately behind the proposed building lies a large permeable
paver patio and grassy areas for a multitude of outdoor activities. Over towards the southwest
corner of the proposed building is a loading dock to service the building connected via asphalt
roadway along the parking garage. South of the building is the proposed parking garage with a
footprint of 30,750 square feet. West of the building, is the relocated sports field laid out to
NCAA regulation. There will be protective fencing and “stop the ball” fencing around the goal
areas. Further west, just past the sports field, is the “M'' which will be improved by the addition
of a retaining wall to expand the observation area. On this drawing, the dashed line work is the

23
proposed work from the Purple Line Project. As mentioned earlier, the design team’s objective is
to minimize changes to the proposed work by the Purple Line. As such, the entrances to the
parking garage will utilize the existing entrance from U.S. Route 1 and the proposed entrance the
Purple Line construction has presented.

Transportation Network
Road Sections

In the figures below, there are four conceptual views near our site. They are Route 1,
Route 1 near the parking garage, Rossborough lane, and Armory-Parking garage.

Figure 17: Route 1 Conceptual View

24
Figure 18: Route 1 Near Parking Garage

Both sections in figure 17 and 18 are on Route 1, hence the speed limit of 35 MPH is the
same along the road. Moreover, road lanes are 11-ft wide, bike lanes are 5-ft, and the median is
16-ft. The difference between them is the smaller distance between the parking garage and Route
1. Because of that, the sidewalk is narrower, instead of 8-ft closer to our new building, we have a
6-ft sidewalk in front of the parking garage.

Figure 19: Rossborough Ln

25
 Rossborough lane will have 13-ft wide lanes to accommodate the Purple Line trains.
Besides that, there are 8-ft wide buffers on each side. Near Turner Lab, we have a 10-ft sidewalk,
and on the other side, we have a 10-ft shared bike/pedestrian lane, and a 11-ft wide exclusive
sidewalk.

Figure 20: Armory-Parking Garage

The last section is the Armory/Parking garage. With a speed limit of 15 MPH and two
11-ft lanes, it is one of the entrances and the only way to exit our parking garage. On the right
side, there two 8-ft sidewalks with a 3-ft wide grass between them.

26
Roof Plans

Utility Modifications

Utility Site Plan

Figure 21: Utility Site Plan CAD Drawing

Utility Demolition
As mentioned earlier, our major utility conflict is the in-service and abandoned steam and
condensate lines running throughout our proposed building footprint, see figure 22 (A). We will
expose and remove these lines from the steam vault to approximately the location of the historic
viewshed. The remaining portion of those lines will be abandoned in place. Another utility
consideration pertains to the work to be done for improvements to the “M”; there is an

27
abandoned steam line in the area, see figure 22(B). We will likely have to expose the portion that
conflicts with the retaining wall, cut the pipe back several feet each way, cap the pipe, and
abandon in-place.

Figure 22: (A) Steam & Condensate Demolition at Existing Sports Field, (B) Utility Conflict at
the Proposed Retaining Wall.

Utility Connections
The relocation of the in-service steam and condensate lines that run throughout the
proposed building footprint will be rerouted as shown in figure 23 below. The new 14” steam
and 10” Condensate will be routed in a typically parallel fashion from existing vaults to the
existing manhole.

28
 Figure 23: Proposed Steam and Condensate Routing

Figure 24 below, shows the proposed routing of the electric from the mechanical room on
the southeast corner of the proposed building which will be routed to the nearest high voltage
line.

Figure 24: Proposed Electric Routing

The following figure, 25, displays the proposed routing for the 4” Gas line to be routed
from the southeast mechanical room of the proposed building to the existing public gas line
underneath route 1.

29
 Figure 25: Proposed Gas Routing
The Sanitary Sewer (S.S.) routing is shown below in figure 26. The proposed 8” S.S. will
be routed across route 1 and tied into an Existing Sanitary Sewer Manhole. All utilities that are
routed across route 1 will be complete in a typical 2 phase process. The near side will be
trenched and shored, pipe laid, reburied/plated, and repeated on the far side.

Figure 26: Proposed Sanitary Sewer Routing

30
 Between the eastern end of the sports field and the northwest corner of the building lies
three proposed storm inlets that will be connected to the existing storm system, refer to figure
27(A). At the “Y” portion of the concrete sidewalk, a proposed bioretention cell with storm pipe
feeding into the existing storm systems, figure 27(A). Lastly shown in figure 27(A), there is a
rain garden up against the concrete walk of the north side of the building with a storm pipe
towards the northeast corner feeding into the existing system. Figure 27(B) displays a
bioretention cell to the east of the parking garage and between route 1, and a rain garden just east
of the southeastern corner of the storefront. Both of these systems will be drained via a tied storm
pipe feeding into the existing system. Another bioretention cell lies between the sports field and
the parking garage shown in figure 27(C). This bioretention cell will be drained via a storm pipe
routed across Rossborough Lane. This pipe will be routed under the work by the Purple line
Project; hence, shall be protected according to the specifications outlined by the Purple Line
Project. Additionally, a portion of the stormwater runoff from the rooftop of the proposed
building will be sloped towards a storm drain towards the southwestern corner of the building,
and fed to the subsurface cistern, refer to figure 27(D).

31
Figure 27: (A) Inlets, Bioretention cell, and Rain Garden North of Building, (B) Bioretention
cells east of Parking Garage and Building, (C) Bioretention Cell between Sports Field and
Parking Garage, and (D) Rooftop drain to Cistern

Figure 28 (A), shows the routing of the proposed 8” water line from the mechanical room
of the proposed building to the existing 18” water line that runs underneath Route 1. Figure
28(B), depicts the proposed water irrigation system to supply water to the natural bermuda grass
sports field. The sourcing of water to feed the water irrigation system is the subsurface cistern
located by the loading dock.

Figure 28: (A) Proposed Water Line Routing, (B) Proposed Water Irrigation System

32
 In figure 29 below, shows the routing of the proposed telephonic communications
(telecom) from the mechanical room of the proposed building across Route 1 to the existing
telecom manhole.

Figure 29: Proposed Telephonic Communications Routing

Limit of Disturbance

The Limit of Disturbance (LOD) delineates the boundary around the site in which soil
will be disturbed for the construction of proposed structures. The LOD for this site is indicated in
Figure 30. This LOD is the same LOD for the existing conditions in order to analyze the change
in land uses.

33
 Figure 30: Limit of Disturbance marked around site indicating boundaries of disturbed soil

Land Use and ESDv

As with most development, the impervious area of the site increases with the proposed design.
The proposed impervious area is 2.7 acres, the proposed pervious is 1.91 acres, and the total site area is
4.61 acres. The existing impervious area percentage is 31%. Proposed conditions increase the impervious
area by 28%, resulting in a proposed impervious area of 59%. These proposed impervious areas
contribute from the building, parking garage, sidewalks, loading dock, and pavement. The proposed green
roof reduces the impervious area by 4% and the patio area on the west side of the building is constructed
out of permeable pavers. Because the existing impervious area is less than 40%, this project does not
count as redevelopment.
An impervious area percentage of 59% and a RCN of 82 calls for a treatment depth of
2.0” and a runoff coefficient of 0.59 in the worst case. The total volume of runoff that needs to be
treated, therefore, is ESDv = (3630ft3/ac-in)PERVAI = (3630ft3/ac-in)(2.0in.)(.59)(4.61ac) =
19,313 ft3.

34
Stormwater Management

In order to account for all of the runoff from the increase in impervious area, we have
established the need for six stormwater management facilities in our site design. One is located
near campus drive and is approximately 1250 ft2 and will treat the runoff produced by the
sidewalk running through the field. The maximum drainage area that this facility can support is
approximately 1157 ft2. Another one is located on the north side of the building and is
approximately 4500 ft2, which will treat runoff from the building, and the sidewalk along the
north side of the building. The maximum drainage area that this facility can support is
approximately 4166 ft2. A third one is located along the east side of the building and is
approximately 1250 ft2 and will be treating runoff produced by the sidewalk in between the
building and garage and some from the building as well. The maximum drainage area that this
facility can support is approximately 1157 ft2. Another facility will be located on the west side of
the parking garage and is approximately 3200 ft2 and will be treating the remaining runoff from
the building, as well as some of the runoff from the parking garage and pavement. The maximum
drainage area that this facility can support is approximately 2909 ft2. A fifth facility will be
located on the east side of the parking garage and is approximately 3400 ft2 and will be treating
the remaining runoff from the parking garage. The maximum drainage area that this facility can
support is approximately 3090 ft2. The final facility will be located on the north side of the
loading dock and will collect the runoff produced from the loading dock which is approximately
300 ft2, the water collected in this facility will be used to water the athletic field. The maximum
drainage area that this facility can support is approximately 6000 ft2. The locations of each of the
facilities can be seen in the figure below.

35
 Figure 31: Location of stormwater management facilities

Additionally, the figure above shows the proposed connections between each stormwater
management facility and the storm drains. The water that does not infiltrate into the ground will
be diverted into these pipes and be processed through the storm drains. Also from the figure, it is
worth noting that the locations of each of the stormwater management facilities are not located
on top of any proposed or existing utilities due to the depth of most facilities. Although already
described, the table below summarizes each of the facilities proposed by our design including the
location, the type of facility, the drainage area leading into it, the area of each facility, and each
facility's ESDv treatment credit.

Table 2: Facilities Description

Facility Location Type of Facility Maximum Facility Area ESDv
Drainage Area (ft2) Treatment
(ft2) Credit (ft3)

East Side of Rain Garden 3090 3400 4320

36
 Parking Garage

West Side of Rain Garden 2909 3200 4590

Parking Garage

East Side of Bioretention 1157 1250 2025

Building Cell

North Side of Bioretention 4166 4500 7290

Building Cell

Near Campus Drive Bioretention 1157 1250 2025

Cell

North Side of Cistern 6000 300 1000

Loading Dock

Total - 18479 19600 21250

As noted earlier the minimum ESDv that we need to treat is at least 19,313 ft3. With our
design, the ESDv that we are treating is 21,250 ft3, so we are treating 10% more than what is
required which will provide a moderate buffer for larger storm and runoff events. From the table
above it can be seen that most of the facilities will be either rain gardens or bioretention
facilities, with the exception of the cistern that will be used to water the athletic field. Although
all of the areas of the facilities will vary, the depth profile for each respective facility will be the
same. The depth design used for all of our rain garden facilities consists of a nine-inch ponding
depth, a three to five-inch mulch bed, and an eighteen-inch bio mix depth. The depth design used
for all of our bioretention cell facilities consists of a one-foot ponding depth, a three-inch mulch
bed, and a two-foot bio mix depth. Both of the designs for the rain gardens and bioretention cells
can be seen in the two images below.

37
 Figure 32: Depth Profile of Rain Garden

Figure 33: Depth Profile of Bioretention Cell

This stormwater management plan not only helps to treat the increase in runoff produced
by our design but also enhances the aesthetics of the area. The stormwater management facilities
chosen like rain gardens and bioretention cells will transfer generic grassy areas into habitats for
organisms and vegetation like birds, frogs, and butterflies. Such wildlife would come to these
stormwater management facilities as they provide food and shelter. In an environmental sense,
these stormwater management facilities will increase the amount of pervious area and help
mitigate flooding. Additionally, these facilities will remove some of the pollutants found in the
runoff, through filtration. By allowing the water to collect in one area, it provides an opportunity
for the water to infiltrate into the ground and to recharge to groundwater, conserving both energy
and water. However, having the facilities drain after a certain time, removes standing water
within the area, thus reducing the breeding of mosquitoes and other insects.

38
Relocated Athletic Field

The sports field will be relocated to the position shown in figures 34(A & B). The field
will be surrounded with fencing and “stop the ball” fencing will be installed as necessary,
especially at the goal ends of the field. In order to support the bermudagrass fields, a water
irrigation system was designed and shown below in figure 34(B). The main source of water that
will feed the system will be the underground cistern located by the loading dock of the proposed
building. This cistern will be filled via storm runoff from the proposed buildings roof. With this
increased water flow in the area, 3 additional storm drains will be located downstream (east) to
catch runoff from the field.

Figure 34: (A) Sports Field Location and Fencing, (B) Sports Field Water Irrigation System

The existing grading of the sports field is relatively flat but does need some regrading in
the south east corner where it is sloped in a direction not uniform with the rest of the field. The
regrading of the field can be seen in Figure 35.

39
 Figure 35: Proposed grading and drainage of sports field and offsite runoff redirection

The proposed grading allows the runoff to flow uniformly east along the length of the
field until it catches in the proposed storm drain system inlets at the toe of the field. The field and
“M” are at the upstream end of the site so figure 35 also displays the drainage pattern of any
runoff from upstream of the site. The dark blue arrows indicate the flow pattern of runoff on the
field. The light blue arrows indicate the flow pattern of any runoff from upstream of the field
which follows the existing grading north of the field or gets caught in a proposed bioretention
pond south of the field.

Improvements to the “M”

The major improvement to the “M” experience is emplacing a 4 ft high retaining wall,
seen in figure 36(A), that will level out the grassy area beyond the current sidewalk. This will
enable lookers better viewpoints and angles for pictures. Additionally, the retaining wall will
separate the “M” from the sports field. The proposed retaining wall can easily be fitted with a
brick veneer or stamped concrete to resemble bricks.

40
 Figure 36: (A) Retaining Wall Footprint, (B) Retaining Wall Section View

While a large portion of the relocated sports field falls on land that was previously graded and
landscaped for athletic use, the grading work nearby the new “M” required special consideration. This
project sought to not only avoid the “M”, but contribute to its aesthetic function for the community. To
this end, we designed a retaining wall around the new sports field. This raised surface will better facilitate
the tradition of taking graduation photos in front of this landmark. The plan view section shown above
demonstrates the planned slope by which runoff travels. To prevent water from building up either behind
or around the retaining wall, weep holes drain onto concrete and aggregate slopes that flow south around
the retaining wall. Not pictured, an additional stormwater retention facility to the SouthEast collects the
extra rain and irrigation water that flows past the retaining wall.

Benefits and Shortcomings

Mid-semester Changes

Table 3: Mid-Semester Changes

Comment Before After Impact

41
Active Steam Vaults, Minimal
5ft distance from
footpath and walled-off

Ensure 10-ft ADA Minimal

Compliant footpath
ways on all 4 sides

Show equipment and Minimal

material laydown area

Provide Cistern Minimal

Ensure Parking Garage Already met Already met In-compliance

is 25 ft away from brick
wall

Entrance/Exit Route 1 Minimal

entrance

100 spaces paid visitor Moderate

parking on upper most
floors

10,000 sq-ft solar panel Significant

on garage rooftop

Utilities crossing purple Prior had no Utilities (1) Storm Drain Pipe Minimal
line work protected via Crossing cross, pipe noted to be
sheathing ran at 90 angle and
protected via sheathing

42
Transportation - Related Design
Role of Transit in the Area
Looking at existing transit networks we have shuttle buses provided by UMD
transportation services such as 104, 114,131, and 132 operating on AM hours on Monday to
Friday from 7:00 am to 5:30 pm. This is with the exception of 104 operating on weekends from
7:00 am to 2:00 am and 131 operating late nights until 11:00 pm. These shuttles have stop
stations close to our site at Ritchie Coliseum on Route 1 and Campus Drive at M-Circle. For the
PM hours we have shuttle buses such as 115, 116, 117 and 118 operating Monday through
Thursday from 5:30 pm to 12: 30 am and on Friday and Saturday from 10:30 am to 3:00 am with
the same stop stations as the AM shuttles. Additional Public transportation is provided by the
Washington metropolitan area transit authority (WMATA). These buses are bus number 83 and
86 operating on route 1 with a stop station right in front of our new site and bus number C2, C8
and F6 operating on Campus drive with a stop station at Campus drive at M Circle. The route of
these transits will not be affected by the construction of our new site. However, we added a bus
station on Route 1 near the entrance of the parking garage, where commuters can have easy
access to the new building.

Criteria for each Roadway

It was not part of Pioneer Engineering to design Route 1 or Rossborough lane. These two
roadways were in charge of the Maryland Department of Transportation, and the company in
charge of the Purple Line. Following the criteria, Route 1 improvements follow the concept of
complete streets with four 11-ft road lanes, two 5-ft exclusive bike lanes, and a 16-ft median.
Rossborough lane will have a different configuration because it is going to accommodate the
Purple Line trains. Therefore, the road lanes will be 13-ft wide, with 8-ft buffers on each side.
Sections on these two lanes were shown on the respective section.The entrance to our parking
garage follows the criteria used in most parking garages. On Route 1, there is one 11-ft entrance
to our parking lot, and there is one entrance for app cars, i.e., Uber and Lyft, and emergency
vehicles. On Rossborough lane, there are two 11-ft lanes, one for entrance, and one for exit.

Following the concept of complete streets that will be implemented as one of the major
improvements around campus, there will be new speed limits, shown in the sections views,
according to the category of the road. Number of lanes and class of the road are the two major
factors to decide the speed limit.

43
 Most of the signs used along Route 1 will be maintained, speed limits will be changed,
and parking and railroad crossings will be added as the figure below.

Figure 37: Traffic near the Parking Garage

Inside the limits of the parking garage, signs and speed limits will follow as the figure below
shows.

44
Figure 38: Vehicle Pattern Changes

The future purple line near our site is assumed to add 400 vehicles to our existing vehicle
volume during both AM and PM peak hours. In addition to the purple line, the new site we’re
designing also adds new volumes to the existing traffic flow. This additional volumes are

- 40 trips into the garage, 10 trips out of the garage on AM Peak Hour

- 30 trips into the garage, 50 trips out of the garage on PM Peak Hour

We distributed these additional volumes based on the distribution of the existing traffic flow
to run a critical lane volume analysis. Hence, for the volume of traffic going into the garage we
distributed it 60 to 40 , with 60% coming from the Route 1 - Campus Drive and Route 1 - Hotel
Drive intersections going into the garage through the Route 1 entrance. The remaining 40% are
coming from the Route 1 - Rossborough Lane intersection going into the garage through the new
intersection. For the volume of traffic going out of the garage, we distributed the AM peak with
40% making a left, 20% going straight through and 40% making a right at the Route 1-
Rossborough Lane intersection. For the PM peak, we have 50% making a left, 10% going
straight through and 40% making a right at the Route 1- Rossborough Lane intersection. The
traffic making a left continues going straight north on route 1 and affects our intersection at the
campus drive and hotel drive. The traffic distribution is briefly summarized in the tables below.

45
Table 4: Traffic distribution of vehicles entering the garage

Into Garage

AM Peak - 40 trips PM Peak - 30 trips

Route 1 - Campus Dr. 60% Route 1 - Campus Dr. 60%

Route 1 - Hotel Dr. Route 1 - Hotel Dr.

Route 1 - Rossborough Ln. 40% Route 1 - Rossborough Ln. 40%

● Straight through (75%) ● Straight through (65%)

● Making a left (25%) ● Making a left (35%)

46
Table 5: Traffic distribution of vehicles leaving the garage

Out of Garage

AM Peak - 10 trips PM Peak - 50 trips

Making left 40% Making left 50%

Straight through 20% Straight through 10%

Making right 40% Making right 40%

Figure 39: New traffic flow travel path

47
 Traffic Analysis
The traffic analysis for the existing conditions and the proposed conditions with the added
trips and the assumptions made for the Purple Line volumes for all the intersections are listed in
Appendix. The summarized result of these analyses are in the table below.

Results Before New Result After New

Constructions Constructions

Intersections
AM PM AM PM

Route 1 - Campus Dr. LOS: B LOS: C LOS: B LOS: C

V/C: 0.67 V/C: 0.79 V/C: 0.68 V/C: 0.8

Route 1 - Hotel Dr. LOS: A LOS: B LOS: A LOS: B

V/C: 0.47 V/C: 0.67 V/C: 0.48 V/C: 0.68

Route 1 - Rossborough Ln. LOS: A LOS: A LOS: C LOS: D

V/C: 0.49 V/C: 0.6 V/C: 0.75 V/C: 0.83

Table 6: CLV analysis of existing intersections

Comparing the new LOS to the existing LOS, we can see that not much changes for the
Route 1 - Campus Drive intersection and the Route 1 - Hotel Drive intersection. But when taking
a look at Route 1 - Rossborough Lane intersection, we can see that the LOS decreases from an A
to a LOS of C and D for the AM and PM peaks respectively. This shows that the intersection is
approaching unsteady flow specially for the PM peak and we expect a traffic delay at this
intersection.

48
 AM Peak PM Peak
New Intersection
LOS: A LOS: A
0.35 0.39

Table 7: CLV analysis of the new intersection

For the CLV analysis of our new traffic flow at the new intersection, we have a LOS of A
for both AM and PM peak hours. From this we can conclude that this new intersection has a free
flow condition with the highest level of driver comfort and with a delay just in exceptional
conditions.

Detour Plan
Detour plan was thought to better accommodate the traffic while our construction is
taking place, and our site is closed. As shown in the figure below, the detour follows the idea of
showing a sign of detour ahead before each bound passes by the closed entrance. After that, signs
located on Route 1 and roads inside campus show the way to the parking garage.

Figure 40: Detour Plan from Construction Plan

49
Student Services Building
Overview
The new student services building must include the following spaces at a minimum:
● Atrium/Lobby - 2,500 square feet
● Street-Level Retail - 30,000 square feet
● Loading Dock - 1,000 square feet.
● Collaboration/Co-Work Space - 30,000 square feet
● Group Study Areas - 20 group study rooms - 500 square feet each.
● Event Space - 30,000 square feet,
● Advising and Scheduling Offices - 15,000 square feet
● Flex Space - 25,000 square feet
● Administrative Offices - 15,000 square feet
● “You Feel Area” - 20,000 square feet

Our student service building has the following specs:

● 6 Floors
● Height -75 ft with 10 ft wall extension
● Open Roof Area
● Green Roof - 8782 SF
● Area - Approx. 40,000 SF
● Foundation - Drill Shaft
Figure 41 below shows a plan view of the student service building.

50
Figure 41: Plan view of the Student Service Building

“You Feel Area”

We were tasked to use a total of 20,000 square feet of space for “uses that YOU feel are
important to new students here at UMD”. We here at Pioneer Engineering believed that the
following items and areas were important to a new student at UMD. The following item and
areas are listed below:

● Makerspace
○ Coding
○ 3D printing
○ Laser cutting
○ Soldering
○ Sewing
○ Wood working
○ Inventing
● Studying/Gathering Area
● Nap Pods

We believe that Makerspace is a great way to get the new student of UMD more active
with hands-on experience, while working on interesting projects, a student will be able to

51
inactive with their fellow school mates, creating a community environment where anyone can
come together. Next we decided that a portion of the area will be given to study/gathering area,
this is a place where students will be able to take a seat with friends or study for a bit. These
areas are very scarce due to the growing number of students at UMD, being able to add more
areas of these will definitely benefit the new student at UMD. Last item we decided to add were
Nap Pods, this item is a nice add to any student service building, students are almost all the time
overwhelmed with the amount of school work that is needed to be done. This being said many
students are deprived of the recommended amount of sleep, just being able to take a quick nap
increases awareness which any student will benefit from. This “You Feel Area” is scattered
across the building to maximize the space in the building. These areas can be found on the floor
plans of the building and they will be labeled as “You Feel”.

On the Figure 42:Level 1 floor plan below you will find the Retail, Atrium/Lobby,
Women/Men Restroom, two elevator shafts, three staircases, a portion of the “You Feel” area,
and the Loading Dock. The restroom, staircases, and elevator shaft are positioned in the same
spot on each floor.

Figure 42: First Floor Plan

52
First Floor-Atrium

The Atrium/Lobby, which is located to the east side of the building is 2,922 square feet.
Since the atrium is located along the edge of the building, it only needs to extend three floors up.
Below in Figure 43 the atrium is shown in detail, you will be able to see a view of the atrium as
you enter the main entrance. In Figure 43 you can see where the elevator and staircase are
located within the atrium.

Figure 43: Arium View from main entrance.

Loading Dock

The size of the loading dock should be at least 1,000 square feet. Our designed loading
dock is 1,156 square feet. The loading dock will have access for a standard delivery truck
(SU-30) to approach, turn, and back-in to the loading dock. In Figure 44 below you can see the
standard dimension of a SU-30 delivery truck. In Figure 45 you can see the view that a SU-30
truck is able to enter, turn, and back into the loading dock.

53
Figure 44: SU-30 Delivery Truck Dimension

Figure 45: View of the loading dock with a SU-30 truck.

54
 On Figure 46 below you will see the second floor plan. On the second floor you will see
the areas that are designated for Advising and Scheduling, “You Feel”, 10 out of the 20 group
study rooms. In the areas that were available we added a maintenance room for any necessary
equipment. On this floor you will be able to see a second floor view of the atrium.

Figure 46: Second Floor Plan

On Figure 47 below you will see the third floor plan. On the third floor you will see the
areas that are designated for Administrative Offices, “You Feel”, 10 out of the 20 group study
rooms. In the areas that were available we added a maintenance room for any necessary
equipment. On this floor you will be able to see a third floor view of the atrium.

55
Figure 47: Third Floor Plan

On Figure 48 below you will see the fourth floor plan. On the fourth floor you will see
the areas that are designated for Collaboration/Co-Work Space, “You Feel”, and a maintenance
room.The collaboration space will be leased to students and alumni at reduced rates, and all must
be located on the same floor.

56
Figure 48: Fourth Floor Plan

On Figure 49 below you will see the fifth floor plan. On the fifth floor you will see the
areas that are designated for Flex Space, “You Feel”, and a maintenance room.The Flex space
will be an area that will be used for any future needs.

57
Figure 49: Fifth Floor Plan

On Figure 50 below you will see the sixth floor plan. On the sixth floor you will see the
areas that are designated for Event Space, “You Feel”, and a maintenance room. The Event space
will have a high ceiling and will be able to be divided in three section with movable partitions.

58
Figure 50: Sixth Floor Plan

On Figure 51 below you will see the Roof floor plan. On the Roof floor you will see the
areas that are designated for green roofs. The green roof will be 8782 SF. This was the max size
we were able to use due to the restriction of the event space which is supported by a truss system.
The roof will be open to the public and they will have access through the three staircases and the
elevator located by the atrium. The undesignated area on the roof can be used for any future
needs.

59
Figure 51: Roof Floor Plan

On Figure 52 & 53 below you will see the column spacing and foundation floor plan. On
the column spacing and foundation floor plan you will see the spacing of the column and the
foundation location. The foundation used for this building is a drill shaft. A drill shaft was
selected because they are used to support structures with large axial and lateral loads. Drilled
shafts are an economic solution that can be installed in a variety of different ground conditions to
accommodate large axial, lateral and overturning forces. The drill shaft will support the
perimeter, it can withstand the large load from the event space. With all the loads acting on this
foundation a recommended length for the drill shaft will be 50 ft.

60
Figure 52: Foundation Floor Plan

Figure 53: Column Spacing Plan

61
 On Figure 54 & 55 you will be able to see the side views of the student service building.
On Figure 56 you can see a cut-away section view of the building, here you will be able to see
where the columns meet the foundation and where the beams connect to the column. Also please
note that the event space ceiling on the sixth is being held by a truss system and the open area is
available for the event space. Another major thing you will see is the area of the atrium which
extends up three floors.

Figure 54: Front and Rear View of the building

62
Figure 55: Side View of the building

63
Figure 56: Cut-away section view of the building

Worst Case Column Calculations

The worst case column is located on the grid of E5. Figure 57 shows the column location and all
necessary information. The calculation are as followed:
Tributary Area = 32.5ft * 38ft = 1235 sf
Live Load(LL) = (# of floor) * (LL per floor) * TA = 6 floor * 1000 lb/sf *1235 sf = 741 kips
Dead Load(DL) Roof = TA * Unit weight * thickness of slab = 1235 sf *145 lb/cf * 1ft =179.075
kips
Dead Load(DL) Floor = TA * Unit weight * thickness of slab * # of floor = 1235 sf *145 lb/cf *
8/12 ft * 6 floors = 716.3 kips
Dead Load(DL) Green Roof = TA * LL * thickness of slab = 1235 sf *100 lb/cf * 9/12 ft =
92.625 kips
Dead Load(DL) Column = TA * Height * Unit weight = 4 sf * 75ft * 145 lb/cf = 43.5 kips
Total Dead Load(DL) = 179.075 kips + 716.3 kips + 92.625 kips + 43.5 kips = 1031.7 kips
Roof Load(RL) = TA * Unit weight = 1235 sf * 100 lb/cf = 123.5 kips
Factored Load(FL) = 1.2(DL) + 1.6(LL) + 0.5(RL) = 1.2(1031.7) + 1.6(741) + 0.5(123.5) =
2423.64 kips

64
Figure 57: Worst column location - E5

Worst Case Beam Calculations

The worst case beam is located between columns E4 and E5. The calculation for both floor and
roof beam are as followed:
Tributary Area = 416.6 sf
Dead Load(DL) = Length of beam * Unit weight * thickness of slab = 35 ft * 145 lb/cf * 9/12 ft
= 3.80625 kips/ft
Live Load(LL) = Length of beam * LL of floor = 35 ft * 100 lb/sf = 3.5 kips/ft
Wu = 1.4(DL) + 1.7(LL) = 1.4(3.80625) + 1.7(3.5) = 11.27875 kips/ft
Mu = (⅛) * Wu * L^2 = (⅛) * (11.27875) * 35^2 = 1727.06 kips-ft

Worst Case Roof Beam Calculation

Tributary Area = 1400 sf
Dead Load(DL) = Length of beam * [Unit weight of concrete * Thickness of roof slab + Unit
weight of green roof * Thickness of green roof * Unit weight of green roof * Thickness of soil =
35 ft *[145 lb/sf * 1 ft + 100 lb/sf * 9/12 ft + 100 lb/sf *.5 ft] = 9.45 kips/ft
Live Load(LL) = Length of beam * LL of floor = 35 ft * 100 lb/sf = 3.5 kips/ft
Wu = 1.4(DL) + 1.7(LL) = 1.4(9.45) + 1.7(3.5) = 19.18 kips/ft
Mu = (⅛) * Wu * L^2 = (⅛) * (19.18) * 35^2 = 2936.94 kips-ft

65
Sustainability

In an effort to continue improving UMD’s sustainability profile, this new construction

was required to comply with LEED certification metrics deserving of at least a Silver
Certification. Of the possible 110 points used to quantify the sustainable contributions of this
project, we evaluated our new student services building and parking garage complex to
satisfactorily meet 50 points. The complete breakdown of points has been included below.

Table 8: The complete breakdown of points awarded to this project.

Points
Y ? N
Awarded

X Credi 1 Integrative Process 1 1

Possible
Location and Transportation Points: 16
LEED for Neighborhood Development
X Credit 1 Location 16 0

X Credit 2 Sensitive Land Protection 1 1

X Credit 3 High Priority Site 2 0

X Credit 4 Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses 5 2

X Credit 5 Access to Quality Transit 5 5

X Credit 6 Bicycle Facilities 1 1

X Credit 7 Reduced Parking Footprint 1 0

Green
X Credit 8 Vehicles 1 1

Possible
Sustainable Sites Points: 10
Y Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Required

X Credit 1 Site Assessment 1 1

Site Development--Protect or Restore
X Credit 2 Habitat 2 0

X Credit 3 Open Space 1 0

X Credit 4 Rainwater Management 3 3

X Credit 5 Heat Island Reduction 2 2

X Credit 6 Light Pollution Reduction 1 0

66
 Possible
Water Efficiency Points: 11
Y Prereq 1 Outdoor Water Use Reduction Required

Y Prereq 2 Indoor Water Use Reduction Required

Building-Level Water
Y Prereq 3 Metering Required

X Credit 1 Outdoor Water Use Reduction 2 0

X Credit 2 Indoor Water Use Reduction 6 0

X Credit 3 Cooling Tower Water Use 2 0

X Credit 4 Water Metering 1 1

Innovatio Possible
n Points: 6
X Credit 1 Innovation 5

X Credit 2 LEED Accredited Professional 1 1

Possible
Regional Priority Points: 4
X Credit 1 Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1

X Credit 2 Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 3

X Credit 3 Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 5

X Credit 4 Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 1

Possible
Energy and Atmosphere Points: 33
Fundamental Commissioning and
Y Prereq 1 Verification Required 1

Y Prereq 2 Minimum Energy Performance Required 1

Y Prereq 3 Building-Level Energy Metering Required

Y Prereq 4 Fundamental Refrigerant Management Required

X Credit 1 Enhanced Commissioning 6 3

X Credit 2 Optimize Energy Performance 18 5

X Credit 3 Advanced Energy Metering 1 1

X Credit 4 Demand Response 2 2

X Credit 5 Renewable Energy Production 3 1

X Credit 6 Enhanced Refrigerant Management 1 1

67
 X Credit 7 Green Power and Carbon Offsets 2 0

Possible
Materials and Resources Points: 13
Y Prereq 1 Storage and Collection of Recyclables Required
Construction and Demolition Waste
Y Prereq 2 Management Planning Required

X Credit 1 Building Life-Cycle Impact Reduction 5 2

Building Product Disclosure and
Optimization - Environmental Product
X Credit 2 Declarations 2 1
Building Product Disclosure and
X Credit 3 Optimization - Sourcing of Raw Materials 2 1
Building Product Disclosure and
X Credit 4 Optimization - Material Ingredients 2 0
Construction and Demolition Waste
X Credit 5 Management 2 2

Possible
Indoor Environmental Quality Points: 16
Y Prereq 1 Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Required

Y Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control Required

Credit 1 Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies 2 1

X Credit 2 Low-Emitting Materials 3 0

Construction Indoor Air Quality
X Credit 3 Management Plan 1 1

X Credit 4 Indoor Air Quality Assessment 2 2

X Credit 5 Thermal Comfort 1 1

X Credit 6 Interior Lighting 2 1

X Credit 7 Daylight 3 2

X Credit 8 Quality Views 1 1

X Credit 9 Acoustic Performance 1 1

Possible
Total 50 Points: 110

68
 Points have been allocated according to the LEED v4 Building Design and Construction Manual
provided for this purpose. Rather than justify each of the 50 points individually, we will show how the
planned development performs in each category and point out the major scoring areas and bonuses.

Transportation contributed a fifth of all the points. This outstanding performance relies heavily on
the existing infrastructure that exists ancillary to the proposed construction. The WMATA’s Purple Line
Project and UMD’s Shuttle Bus network converge in a way that is accessible to the new building. It was a
simple matter to include bicycle infrastructure and safe pedestrian access to the existing facilities. A
regional priority bonus point was awarded for the high degree of premium public transit access.

This project team made an extra effort to include high end storm water control and reuse
measures. Namely, these efforts include a vegetated roof, stormwater runoff retention ponds, and
stormwater reuse for irrigation purposes. The vegetated roof acts as a permeable area for rainwater
capture, and has the added benefit of reducing heat island effects from the building itself. Unfortunately,
the indoor water codes upheld by the University precluded much of the water efficiency measures that
may have been possible for the interior living spaces. Another regional priority bonus point was awarded
for the high degree of rainwater management.

The energy and atmosphere provided the largest plurality of points from any one category with
13. The roof coverings are primarily responsible for this, as the green roof contributes to optimized
energy performance and the solar panels installed over the garage provide a source of renewable energy.
Additionally the HVAC performance is intended to be balanced and updated to the most current standard
of energy performance.

Some of the reality of the materials and resource category would be ultimately dependent on the
ability of the contractor to economically conform to the material reuse standards. For design purposes, we
intended for enough reuse of topsoil, asphalt, utility conduit, and architectural bricks (from the historic
wall) to qualify for six of the points.

Finally, the new student services building is designed with the intention to meet a high standard of
environmental quality for the users of the interior habitable spaces. Large curtain windows have been
included on the two sides of the building to capture as much of the eastern and southern sun as possible to
promote mental wellbeing. Additionally, the previously mentioned advanced HVAC system will be
responsible for accurately mitigating hazards that can be present in poorly maintained air circulation
systems.

The final point was awarded for consulting with official LEED accreditor Gabe Sarecky (UMD
‘19) about the technical details of this plan.

The high volume of site development and stormwater management facilities demanded that particular
attention be paid to the planting and vegetation that should be used to create cohesion and aesthetic appeal
among the spaces. In addition to the psychological benefits of well maintained vegetation, the selection

69
and maintenance of these plants serves a critical role in treating the stormwater runoff and promoting safe
behavior in the outdoor spaces. The following table outlines some of the plant choices and locations.

Table 9: Vegetation Description

Name Image Location Reason

Sedum Green Roof Small size maximum

and only requires
lightweight substrate

Fame Flower Greef Roof Thrives in full sun and

well draining soils

Liriope Groundcover/ Near Low growth profile

Garage

Honey Locust Tree Bioretention Facilities Grows comfortably in

saturated soils

70
 Pin Oak Alongside Campus Matches existing trees
Drive and Rte 1 along Campus Drive

Golden Raintree Between Building Patio Matches trees in

and Sports Field Hornbake plaza, easy to
maintain

While it will take a number of years for all of these plants to reach maturity, it is imperative that
they be maintained appropriately throughout the lifespan of the building. UMD’s extensive and competent
Buildings and Grounds crew should have no problem keeping the tree compliant with Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.

CPTED already exists through passive systems, like the emergency blue lights, all around
campus. This new construction would build upon these systems, with particular focus on Natural
Surveillance and Territorial Reinforcement. Windows have been positioned to provide observation of
exterior living areas. Vegetation has been specified to be either below 3’ or above 7’ from the ground for
the same reason. The territory will be reinforced by including the historic brick wall as separation from
US Rte 1 and by displaying UMD signage and student life paraphernalia.

71
Parking Garage
Overview:
The new parking garage must include the total number of spaces lost in the two existing
lots near the site (which were close to 300 parking spaces), as well as 50 additional spaces for the
retail uses in the new building. All parking will be visitor or short-term parking. No permit
parking. Sidewalks should be no less than 10 feet wide along the site frontage, and eight feet
wide in other areas.

Our parking garage has the following specs:

● Five Floors
● Height- 42 ft
● Area - Approx. 30800 SF
● Parking Spot - 346 - 9’x18’
○ 8-ADA-compliant
○ EV-Parking
○ Compact
● 100 Paid-to-Park
● Solar Roof - Approx. 10,000 sf
● Shallow Foundation
Figure 58 below shows a plan view of the parking garage.

Figure 58: Plan view of the parking garage.

72
 On Figure 59-63 you will be able to see the floor plan of the whole parking garage. Here
you can see where the parking spaces are planned to be placed. You can also see where the
ADA-compliant spaces are located. Many of these parking spaces can easily be converted into
EV-spaces or compact spaces. Another main area are the 100 parking spaces that are designated
for park as you park and these are located on the upper floors of the parking garage.

Figure: First floor plan

73
Figure 60: Second floor Plan

74
Figure 61: Third floor Plan

75
Figure 62: Fourth floor Plan

76
Figure 63: Roof floor Plan

On Figure 64 & 65 below you will see the column spacing and foundation floor plan. On
the column spacing and foundation floor plan you will see the spacing of the column and the

77
foundation location. The foundation used for the parking garage is a shallow foundation. A
shallow foundation is a type of building foundation that transfers building loads to the earth very
near to the surface, rather than to a subsurface layer or a range of depths as does a deep
foundation. Shallow foundations are primarily used for structures with less weight over its total
footprint, which is the case with this parking garage. With all the loads acting on this foundation
a recommended base for the shallow foundation will be 11 ft.

Figure 64: Column Location and spacing

78
Figure 65: Foundation Location

In order to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, we were tasked to provide at least
10,000 square feet of solar panels on the roof of the garage. We develop a framing plan for a
steel structure that extends above the top floor of the garage to support the panels. On Figure 66

79
you can see the planned steel framework that we designed to support the solar panel roof and on
Figure 67 is a 3D view of what the planned framework will look like.

Figure 66: Steel frame for the solar panel roof

80
 Figure 67: Plan View of the solar roof

On Figure 68 & 69 you will be able to see the side views of the parking garage. On
Figure 70 you can see a cut-away section view of the building, here you will be able to see where
the columns meet the foundation and where the beams connect to the column.

81
Figure 68: Front and Rear View of the parking garage

82
Figure 69: Side View of the parking garage

83
Figure 70: Cut-away section view of the parking garage

Worst Case Column Calculations

The worst case column is located on the grid of B2 or B4. Figure 71 shows the column location
and all necessary information. The calculation are as followed:
Tributary Area = 35 ft * 35.5 ft = 1242.5 sf
Dead Load(DL) = TA * Unit weight * thickness of slab * # of floors = 1242.5 sf *145 lb/cf *
8/12 ft * 4 floors = 480.43 kips
Live Load = (# of floor) * (LL per floor) * TA = 4 floors * 100 lb/sf * 1242.5 sf = 497 kips
Snow Load = 50 lb/sf * 1242.5 sf = 62.12 kips
Factored Load = 1.2(DL)+1.6(LL)+0.5(SL) = 1.2(480.43)+1.6(497)+0.5(62.12) = 1402.78 kips

84
Figure 71: Worst column location - B2

Worst Case Floor Beam Calculation

The worst case beam is located between columns A1 and B2. Using a 25-foot inverted-tee beam,
one 9-foot wide double-tee beam and two 8-foot wide double-tee beams that are 65’ 6” in length.
The calculation for both floor and roof beam are as followed:
Tributary Area - 1637.5 SF
Dead Load = 47 lb/sf * 65.5 ft * 25 ft = 76.96 kips
Live Load = 50 lb/sf * 65.5 ft * 25 ft = 81.88 kips
Service Load per Linear Foot = (81.88 + 76.96)/25 = 6.36 kips-ft
A 12 in inverted-tee was selected using the precast table due to a 12 in inverted-tee having a load
capacity of 8.29 kips-ft

Worst Case Roof Beam Calculation

The worst case beam is located between columns A1 and B2. Using a 25-foot inverted-tee beam,
one 9-foot wide double-tee beam and two 8-foot wide double-tee beams that are 65’ 6” in length.
The calculation for both floor and roof beam are as followed:
Tributary Area - 1637.5 SF
Dead Load = 47 lb/sf + 5 lb/sf * 65.5 ft * 25 ft = 85.15 kips
Live Load = 50 lb/sf + 20 lb/sf * 65.5 ft * 25 ft = 114.63 kips
Service Load per Linear Foot = (114.63 + 85.15)/25 = 7.99 kips-ft
A 12 in inverted-tee was selected using the precast table due to a 12 in inverted-tee having a load
capacity of 8.29 kips-ft

85
Pavement Design

Pavement Plan

Figure 72: Utility Site Plan CAD Drawing

86
Flexible Pavement Calculations

The following flexible pavement design formula was used to determine that the
Estimated Single Axle Load (ESALs) over the pavement's life was 10,840.5. Using AASHTO
Flexible Pavement Design Structural Number formula, the structural number was found to be
2.18. Since the value is reported to be less than 3.4, Prince George’s County minimum pavement
dimensions of 6” Asphalt and 6” Aggregate base will be used in this design.

W18 = [ (ADT) (T) (TF) ] * D * L * Y * G * 365

Inputs : Average daily traffic (ADT) = 800 Vehicles

Percent of Truck/Bus (T) = 5% (all SU)
Truck Factor (TF) = 0.09
Directional Distribution (D) = 50%
Lane distribution factor (L) = 1
Design period (Y) = 15 years
Growth Factor (G) = 1.1

Output :- W18 = 10840.5

Table 10: AASHTO Flexible Pavement Design

87
Sections of Pavements
The following table will have the summary of key characteristics for each section:

Table 11: Section of Pavements

Thickness/ Material Thickness/Material Specified
Slab/ Pavement Base Reinforcement

Concrete Apron 15” 4000 psi concrete 8” dense graded #6 Rebar

aggregate base

Concrete Sidewalk 4-6” 3000 psi 6” dense graded #5 Rebar

concrete aggregate base

Asphalt Pavement 1.5” Surface Course, 6” dense graded N/A

3” Intermediate aggregate base
Course,
3” Base Course HMA

Permeable Paver 3 ⅛” Concrete Paver 2” #8 Bedding Stone, N/A

6” #57 River Stone
18” #2 Reservoir
Stone,

88
Figure 73: (A) Concrete Pavement/Apron, (B) Concrete Sidewalk, (C) Asphalt Pavement, and
(D) Permeable Paver

89
Construction Methodology
The first step will be to come up with the location of the tower crane. Since the tower
crane typically needs a deep foundation that will stay in place after the project, the best idea
would be to place it in the middle of the site, slightly away from the building, as shown in figure
75. Such a location for the tower crane will be beneficial considering that the construction of the
garage will run concurrent with the Student Services building. After that, a construction fence
will be installed, tightly enclosing the two buildings. With the water flowing southwest to
northeast, a super-silt fence will be on the northeast side of the building to account for all runoffs
from the construction site. Additionally, there will be an earth dike, which connects to an existing
storm drain, running northwest of the Student Services building to redirect the water from
coming into the site (see figure 74). A storage area and a stockpile will be located just outside of
the construction fence. Along the fence, there will be three pedestrians closed entrances to ensure
that no one comes into the site when in construction. To ensure that the pedestrian circulation is
not disturbed, there will be a new route in place and precautions to ensure the safety of all. The
proposed entrance when the project is done will serve as a stabilized construction entrance for
the time being. Vehicles and trucks will exit at the junction where the purple line road and our
proposed exit meet. A washout zone will be in place near the exit, for trucks.

Figure 74: Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

90
Figure 75: Construction Methodology

91
Cost Estimate and Schedule
Here are the major costs per categories:
1. Preliminary: $1,232553.38
2. Grading/ Excavation: $879,590.00
3. Drainage: $722,702.25
4. Site-Related Structures (Not Buildings): $68,800.00
5. Paving: $145,000.00
6. Shoulders: $512,625.00
7. Landscaping: $80,300.25
8. Traffic and Utilities: $330,000.00
9. Site buildings: $104,051,729.20

The total neat construction costs are $108,023,290.08. After a 15% contingency, we get
$124,226,783.59. Then a 12.5% construction overhead, giving us a subtotal of $139,755,131.53.
The total cost of the project after adding a 10% preliminary engineering is $152,177,809.89.
Therefore the project is set to cost in the range of $153,000,000 to $169,000,000

Table 12 shows a summary of the construction milestones. It’s important to note that
every week equals five days. The notice to proceed will be June 2, 2021. It should take
● two weeks for the mobilization
● 13 weeks for the utility relocations,
● five weeks for the improvement of the “M”,
● five weeks for the turf field relocation,
● 34 weeks (~8 months) for the garage, 1
● 10 weeks (~2.5 years) for the Student Services Building,
● 13 weeks for site work,
● two weeks for final surface pavements and a week to finalize the pavement
markings.
The project will finish on February 14, 2024, two years and eight months in total length.
Some items such as the “M” relocation and garage will not appear on the critical path because
they will be concurrent with some items on the schedule. The Gantt chart in figure X-x and
figure x-x highlights the critical path in red.

92
Table 12: Construction Milestones

93
Figure 76-1: Gantt Chart view of the Schedule (1)

Figure 76-2: Gantt Chart view of the Schedule (2

94
Stakeholder and Public Involvement Plan
A project of this scale requires input from an extensive network of interested parties including elected
officials, community leaders, and institutions, herein referred to as “stakeholders.” In order to capture all
of the many possible stakeholders, they have been listed below in tabulated form.

Table 13: A non-exhaustive list of stakeholders involved with permitting and plan approval
Organization Name Position

University of Maryland Daryll Pines President

Charles Reuning Chief Facilities Officer

USM Capital Improvement Program Mark Beck Oversees funding for construction
in the USM

UMD Board of Regents Linda Gooden The board is collectively

responsible for approving
Barry Gossett developmental plans for the UMD
campus. Only chaired members
Gary Attman have been listed.
Bill Wood

Joseph Bartenfelder

Robert Rauch

Federal Government Anthony Brown House Representative

State Senator (District 21) James Rosapepe Budget and Taxation Committee

State Representatives (District 21) Ben Barnes Appropriations Committee

Mary Lehman Environment and Transportation

Joseline Pena-Melnyk Health and Government Operations

Maryland Department of Andre Futrell MDOT’s involvement in Rte 1

Transportation traffic disruptions for utility
relocation
Kewsi Woodroffe

County Angela Alsobrooks PG County Executive

95
 Lennox Douglas Chair of Board of Registration
Building Contractors

Mel Franklin County Council for CP

Thomas Dernoga

College Park Patrick Wojahn College Park Mayor

Llatetra Brown Esters CP Council

Monroe Dennis

University SGA Student Concerns

Images Tour Group Incoming Student

Terrapin Works Maker Design Space

SEE Student Entertainment Event Space

North CP Citizens Association Mary Cook President

Chesapeake Climate Action Network Mike Tidwell Executive Director

Environment Maryland Kate Breimann State Director

Clean Water Action Emily Ranson State Director

In order to accommodate this extensive list of interested parties, this project requires thorough and
efficient communication. A flowchart of the primary modes of communication has been included here.

96
Figure 77: A flowchart overview of communication channels for stakeholders

In response to the increasing hazards associated with public gatherings during the uncertain
duration of the Covid-19 pandemic, public hearing would be hosted via virtual meeting software when
possible. This project team recognizes the difficulties that some populations, especially senior citizens,
may encounter with the digital format, we also recommend that the board with permit postings also host a
suggestions and questions box. Different digital media may be more accessible than others, which is why
project information will be made available via email, information hotline, and social media email blasts.

97
Summary and Conclusion
With the transition of power from former President Loh to current President Pines, it is unlikely
that this piece of the Rte 1 development project will come to fruition. While it may have been satisfying
to know that the work and plans described heretofore could have gone on to the production stage, this
theoretical design project has set the stages of our careers for many project implementations to come.
Engineering sets itself apart from the liberal arts and research sciences, in that the lessons and skills
developed in college translate directly into a professional setting. It is fitting then that the class that caps
off the entire experience so closely mimics the function and purpose of an engineering firm. Thanks to the
careful initial coordination, not to mention the tireless efforts throughout the semester, by the phenomenal
course instructor, Russ Anderson, our team combined a broad range of technical specialties and
personalities. Coming together, we produced the initial plans for a new student services building, parking
garage, surrounding site development, utility coordination, stormwater management, and all the
supporting legwork that goes into designing a project of this scale.
Brian and William did much of the heavy lifting involved with designing the final structures and
surrounding site. Together, they produced almost all of the computer aided drafting and design drawings
seen in this final report. They patiently responded to the project’s demands for more or less square
footage, and where the intended structures would go. The layout of these major structures dictated the
design of the other disciplines, namely traffic and hydrologic basins.
Melat and Rodrigo scrupulously analysed existing traffic conditions and transportation networks.
They designed new roads and pathways to complement a complex system of roads, train tracks, and bike
lanes. The traffic design process was heavily influenced by the ongoing Purple Line project and the
University’s commitment to accessible public transport.
Deanna and Alex collaborated to perfect the stormwater management systems. They had to
consider existing conditions, proposed conditions, and how standing legislation affects the relationship
between them. As a result of their designing and redesigning, the finished project has an outstanding plan
to detain and treat even large storm events.
Max noted the exceptional stormwater management plan in the sustainability review. This was
among the logistical components of enabling such a project to happen. The other half of getting approval
was the stakeholder list and public involvement plan.
Jules’s unflagging leadership kept all the various disciplines on track, while simultaneously
designing the construction scheduling, cost estimation, and ensuring compliance with design criteria.
The sum of these parts is truly greater than the sum of its parts, as the resulting design and
construction plan is actionable as a 60% design. In theory, this report and the adjacent presentation would
be useful tools for the responsible parties to make decisions about how to proceed in developing the
Engineering Fields. This project has been an invaluable lesson in the myriad considerations that go into
large scale civil engineering projects. Pioneer Engineering would like to thank the University and its
faculty for this world class educational opportunity.

98
List of Sources

1. Blue Giant. Dock System Guide. Retrieved from:

https://www.bluegiant.com/Files/Architects/Loading-Dock-System-Guide.aspx
2. Design Integration Using Autodesk Revit 2020 by Daniel John Stine
3. “Environmental Site Design (ESD) Redevelopment Examples.” Maryland Department of the
Environment, 2010.
4. Getter, K. L., & Rowe, D. B. (2008). Selecting plants for extensive green roofs in the United
States. Michigan State University Extension.
5. Marylanders Plant Trees. (n.d.). Retrieved October 13, 2020, from
https://dnr.maryland.gov/forests/Pages/MarylandersPlantTrees/Recommended-Tree-List.aspx
6. Maryland Accessible Parking Spaces, http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/permittingservices
7. Parking Design Guidelines, Boise, 2016,
https://ccdcboise.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CCDC-Boise-Parking-Structure-Design-Guid
elines_2016-Final-Draft-08-04-2016.pdf
8. “Perimeter Control Perimeter Control.” Perimeter Control - Minnesota Stormwater Manual,
stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Perimeter_control.
9. “Web Soil Survey.” USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Services.,
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. 11 October 2020.

99