The Open Collections website will be unavailable July 27 from 2100-2200 PST ahead of planned usability and performance enhancements on July 28. More information here.

UBC Undergraduate Research

East Mall Redesign - Preliminary Design Report Biela, Kristian; Galovich, Dylan; Grier, Dylan; Gu, Rossi; Maquignaz, Ben; Martin, Steve; McCowan, Braeden 2021-04-15

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Biela_K_et_al_CIVL446_East Mall_redesign_2021.pdf [ 18.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0400168.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0400168-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0400168-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0400168-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0400168-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0400168-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0400168-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0400168-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0400168.ris

Full Text

         East Mall Redesign - Preliminary Design Report     Prepared by: Kristian Biela, Dylan Galovich, Dylan Grier, Rossi Gu, Ben Maquignaz, Steve Martin, Braeden McCowan Prepared for:   Course Code: CIVL 446 University of British Columbia   Date: 15 April 2021       Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS Sustainability Program provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student research project and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore, readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Sustainability Program representative about the current status of the subject matter of a report”.  University of British Columbia  Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Sustainability Program  Student Research Report  UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Sustainability Program  Student Research Report       East Mall Redesign – Preliminary Design Report    Biela, Kristian  Galovich, Dylan  Grier, Dylan  Gu, Rossi  Maquignaz, Ben  Martin, Steve  McCowan, Braeden    University of British Columbia  CIVL 446  April 15, 2021      Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS Sustainability Program provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student research project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore, readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Sustainability Program representative about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.      Executive Summary Team 11 was engaged by UBC SEEDS Sustainability Program for the East Mall Redesign Project to improve and accommodate all modes safely and effectively along the corridor. Throughout the past 8 months, Team 11 has created a comprehensive detailed design to suit the needs of East Mall users. The current layout is tailored for vehicle traffic and parking, while mostly neglecting the need for active mode infrastructure and sports field access. Some of the primary corridor users identified are pedestrian and cyclist commuters, sports field users, vehicle commuters, and maintenance and delivery vehicles.   Starting with the preliminary design, the first step was identifying the project goals and background. Three design options were generated, each being focused on a key client objective, including a multi-use path option, traffic calming option, and enhancing the existing configuration. Once these were conceptualized, a weighted decision matrix was used to organize the client objectives into ranking criteria used to select the optimal design, which was evaluated separately for the transportation and structural components. Acceptance of this procedure and the proposed design by the client in December 2020 led to the finalization of a drawing package and the detailed design elements, which is summarized in this detailed design report. The final design features primarily shifted corridor space from vehicle traffic to sustainable modes, while minimizing the effect on vehicle traffic and business operations. With a key design constraint being the width of the corridor; the final design removes the existing median and arranging vehicle traffic on the west side of the road, space was created to integrate a multi-use path on the east side, while improving the amount of greenspace and natural character in the corridor. Safety to all road users was always at the forefront of decision making and the corridor has been designed to maximize this. The proposed design will also need to integrate seamlessly to accommodate all existing and planned infrastructure; one being the planned Stadium Neighborhood development. Finally, the design is     intended to promote mode shift to align with UBC’s goal of reducing vehicle traffic and increasing pedestrian and carpooling modes of travel. Summarizing the goals and objectives stated above, the following list highlights the main features of the final detailed design:  A 4.6m-wide Pedestrian Weather Canopy extending 65m from East Mall to Health Sciences Mall along Agronomy Road;    A 5m-wide shared multi-use path from W16th Avenue to Thunderbird Boulevard, including covered bicycle parking at the recreational fields;    Retain parallel parking along both sides of the corridor, with an emphasis on increasing pedestrian sightlines;    A 60m separated pick-up/drop-off lane near Stadium Road, with 18 time-restricted diagonal parking stalls;    Two RRFB systems installed at crosswalks at Stadium Road, and at Eagles Drive;    Green infrastructure to reduce water quantity, run-off, and add to the aesthetic of the roadway;   Retain stop-control for the East Mall at Agronomy Road intersection, incorporating landscape changes; and    Integrate roundabout control at the Thunderbird Boulevard intersection, which will add components of increased road user safety, traffic calming, and emission reductions. Construction of this project is expected to take place between the period of May 2021 to October 2021 and the total project capital cost is estimated to be ~ $3,906,000.       Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Site Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Project Objectives................................................................................................................................ 8 1.4 Design Constraints ............................................................................................................................... 9 1.5 Team Member Contributions ........................................................................................................... 11 2.0 Key Design Components ....................................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Road Design ...................................................................................................................................... 13 2.1.1 Traffic Forecasting and Synchro Modelling................................................................................ 13 2.1.2 Typical Cross-Sections ................................................................................................................ 13 2.1.3 Sub-grade Cross Section............................................................................................................. 14 2.1.4 Signage and Pavement Markings ............................................................................................... 14 2.2 Intersection Design ........................................................................................................................... 14 2.2.1 Stadium Road ............................................................................................................................. 14 2.2.2 Thunderbird Boulevard .............................................................................................................. 15 2.2.3 Agronomy Road ......................................................................................................................... 16 2.3 Multi-Modal Design .......................................................................................................................... 17 2.3.1 Multi-use Path ............................................................................................................................ 17 2.3.2 Covered Bicycle Parking ............................................................................................................. 19 2.3.3 Crosswalk Upgrades ................................................................................................................... 19 2.3.4 Bus Stops .................................................................................................................................... 20 2.4 Pick-up / Drop-off Lane ..................................................................................................................... 20 2.5 Vehicle On-Street Parking ................................................................................................................. 21 2.6 Stormwater Management................................................................................................................. 21 2.6.1 Groundwater & Drainage ........................................................................................................... 22 2.6.2 Green Infrastructure .................................................................................................................. 24 2.7 Landscape and Greenspace Design ................................................................................................... 25 2.8 Structural Designs ............................................................................................................................. 26 2.8.1 Pedestrian Weathering Canopy ................................................................................................. 26 2.8.2 Bicycle Canopy ........................................................................................................................... 27 2.8.3 Structural Member Sizing .......................................................................................................... 28 2.8.4 Foundation Design ..................................................................................................................... 28 2.8.5 Shear Connection ....................................................................................................................... 30 3.0 Design Criteria ....................................................................................................................................... 30 3.1 Design Loadings ................................................................................................................................ 30     3.1.1 Transportation ........................................................................................................................... 31 3.1.2 Structural.................................................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Adopted Design Life .......................................................................................................................... 32 3.2.1 Transportation ........................................................................................................................... 32 3.2.2 Structural.................................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Standards and Software Packages .................................................................................................... 32 3.4 Other Design Aspects ........................................................................................................................ 33 3.4.1 Economic .................................................................................................................................... 33 3.4.2 Environmental ............................................................................................................................ 34 3.4.3 Societal ....................................................................................................................................... 34 3.4.4 Regulatory .................................................................................................................................. 35 3.4.5 Risk Management ...................................................................................................................... 35 4.0 Construction Planning ........................................................................................................................... 35 4.1 Construction Requirements .............................................................................................................. 36 4.1.1 Permitting .................................................................................................................................. 36 4.1.2 Waste Disposal + Recycling Plan ................................................................................................ 36 4.1.3 Traffic Management Plan ........................................................................................................... 37 4.2 Construction Sequence ..................................................................................................................... 38 4.2.1 Phase 1 – South Bound Lane Construction ................................................................................ 38 4.2.2 Phase 2 – Greenspace Construction on Northbound Lane ........................................................ 38 4.2.3 Phase 3 – Roundabout Construction at Intersection of Thunderbird Boulevard ...................... 38 4.3 Service Life Maintenance Plan .......................................................................................................... 38 4.4 Anticipated Issues ............................................................................................................................. 39 4.5 Construction Schedule ...................................................................................................................... 39 4.6 Class C Cost Estimate ........................................................................................................................ 40 5.0 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................. 40 References .................................................................................................................................................. 42 Appendix A: Issued for Construction Drawings .......................................................................................... 44 Appendix B: Construction Schedule ............................................................................................................ 45 Appendix C: Cost Estimate & Benefit Cost Analysis ...................................................................................... 1 Appendix D: Synchro Report Sample .......................................................................................................... 11 Appendix E: Calculations ............................................................................................................................. 13        List of Figures Figure 1: Site Overview ................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 2: Typical Road Base Sub-grade ....................................................................................................... 14 Figure 3: Stadium Road Intersection ........................................................................................................... 15 Figure 4: Thunderbird Roundabout Configuration ..................................................................................... 16 Figure 5: Agronomy Road Intersection ....................................................................................................... 17 Figure 6: Typical Multi-use Path Sub-grade ................................................................................................ 18 Figure 7: RRFB Detail ................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 8: Pick-up Drop-Off Lane .................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 9: Drainage Sub catchments ............................................................................................................ 24 Figure 10: Weathering Canopy Location and Vehicle Access Opening....................................................... 27 Figure 11: Canopy Foundation Design Arrangement .................................................................................. 29 Figure 12: Sample of Existing Synchro Model ............................................................................................. 33 Figure 13: Excerpt from Risk Register ......................................................................................................... 35  List of Tables Table 1 Design Constraints and Rationale .................................................................................................. 12 Table 2: Catch Basin Type and Spacing ....................................................................................................... 23 Table 3: Catch Basin Design ........................................................................................................................ 23 Table 4: Runoff Coefficients ........................................................................................................................ 24 Table 5: Green Infrastructure Design Targets ............................................................................................. 25 Table 6: Green Infrastructure Type and Cost .............................................................................................. 25 Table 7: Member Sizing ............................................................................................................................... 28 Table 8: Design Loads .................................................................................................................................. 32 Table 9: Breakdown of Required Permits and Justifications ...................................................................... 36 Table 10: Class C Cost Breakdown .............................................................................................................. 40       1.0 Introduction 1.1 Project Background Beginning in September 2020, Team 11 was approached by UBC SEEDS (Social Ecological Economic Development Study) Sustainability Program to develop a new design for the East Mall corridor, beginning with a preliminary design report that was delivered in December 2020. This reported highlighted the project goals and targets, background research, and the design process; including potential design options, weighting criteria, and the final selection process. Over the past 4 months, Team 11 has been refining its proposed design to a detailed, construction-ready package, which is described in detail throughout this report. The Final Detailed Design Report has been supplied on behalf of Team 11 (CIVL 445 Group 11) for the University of British Columbia. The Detailed Design outlines a full roadway redesign for East Mall located on the University of British Columbia’s Vancouver campus. We acknowledge that the project takes place on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded territory of the Musqueam people.  The purpose of the redesign to update the corridor to better align with UBC Campus Policy and Objectives for sustainable transportation options. Referencing the 2014 UBC Transportation plan, some of the key goals are: 1.0 Sustainable Transportation 1.1 By 2040 at least 66% of trips to and from UBC will be made by walking, cycling, or transit; 1.2 Maintain at least 50% of trips to and from the campus on public transit; 2.0 Single Occupant Vehicles (SOV) 2.1 Reduce SOV travel to and from UBC by 20% from 1996 levels; 2.2 Maintain at least 30% reduction from 1997 levels in daily SOV trips per person to and from UBC; 3.0 Daily Private Automobile Traffic: 3.1 Maintain daily private automobile traffic at less than 1997 levels. Construction is set to start May 1, 2020 immediately proceeding the submission of the Detailed Design Report. It is estimated that construction will take place over 70 days and cost approximately $3.9M.       1.2 Site Overview East Mall is approximately 1.0km long running north-west to south-east between West 16th and Agronomy Road. The current East Mall corridor right of way (ROW) is approximately 25.5m wide and consists of single travel lanes separated by a wide median, street bike lanes, curbside parking, and sidewalks on both sides of the roadway. In addition to frequent vehicle speeding and the abundance of impermeable asphalt road surface, safety concerns between cyclists, parking, and pedestrians crossing require urgent addressing.  The area sees a high demand of pick-up and drop-off activity due to several sport fields and the Stadium in the immediate vicinity. The East Mall Upgrade will tie in with the new alignment at the south end of the future Stadium Neighborhood but drastically improve the roadway between Stadium and Agronomy Road. A site overview can be seen in Figure 1.  Figure 1: Site Overview     1.3 Project Objectives A full redesign of East Mall between W16th Avenue and Agronomy Road is required to align with UBC’s Transportation Plan for sustainable transportation goals. These goals include promoting active transportation through walking, cycling, or transit, reducing single occupant vehicles, and maintaining private automobile traffic at less than 1997 levels. The planned upgrades will improve pedestrians and cyclists' access to convenient infrastructure and increase mobility such that trips are easily connected from the core of campus to the south commercial district, and to the Pacific Spirit Park Trail System. The client identified objectives for the work to be undertaken include:  Prioritize buses, cyclists, and pedestrians over personal vehicles By enhancing the existing pedestrian and cyclist facilities to promote mode shift towards sustainable options over single occupancy vehicles, the East Mall Redesign will align with the goals set by UBC’s Transportation Plan.    Minimize costs and maximize safety for all roadway users While costs are a key component of the project that should be minimized, safety must be held paramount as one of the key design objectives for the East Mall redesign. This includes fostering a safe active transportation network through visibility and infrastructure upgrades. In addition, vehicle speeds along the corridor should be reduced through traffic calming measures such as curb bulb outs and narrower travel lanes.  Incorporate either a pedestrian tunnel OR a covered walkway for pedestrians along Agronomy Road By providing pedestrian weather protection through the incorporation of a pedestrian canopy along Agronomy Road, students and other users will prioritize walking in Vancouver’s wet climate. If the pedestrian tunnel option is exercised, intersection performance at Agronomy and East Mall will be greatly improved.      Incorporate green infrastructure to retain rainwater on-site The wide median that currently separates the travel lanes along the East Mall corridor provides a significant green space for stormwater infiltration and management. This large area provides an opportunity for redesign to better organize the ROW into an effective rainwater strategy. The corridor redesign is expected to provide similar or increased drainage performance, which includes green space for aesthetic appeal, and adding green infrastructure where applicable for effective storm water management. Our team has looked to the City of Vancouver’s Rain City Strategy for applicable infrastructure and rainwater management techniques.  Accommodate pick-up/drop-off needs for fields safely and efficiently The section of the East Mall corridor adjacent to the Stadium Road intersection is a hotspot for pick-up and drop-off due to the numerous recreational fields. Parents often crowd the currently insufficient drop-off space at peak hours, which results in blocking of the on-street bike lanes and creates an unsafe situation for both the vulnerable road users and on-street traffic. Designing a pick-up/drop-off hub where parents can safely deliver their kids while simultaneously incentivizing active transportation modes by providing upgraded bicycle parking will provide a safe and sustainable, long term solution to the pick-up/drop-off issue. 1.4 Design Constraints The proposed East Mall Redesign must align with the UBC Design Guidelines and UBC Transportation Plan among other design documents. To adhere to these documents, a series of constraints ranging from the retention of on-street parking to the overall project cost will guide our preliminary design. Some of the primary design constraints are mentioned and explained below.  Integration with the planned Stadium Neighbourhood     The design requires a seamless alignment at the south end of the future Stadium Neighborhood development, including a reduction in curb-to-curb space between W16th Avenue and Stadium road, and provisions for the incorporation of the East-West promenade mid-block.  Space Constraints One of the major design constraints for the East Mall redesign are the space constraints, including the cross-section right-of-way, green space integration, and the space constraints for the intersection designs at Agronomy Road, and at Thunderbird Boulevard. Additionally, incorporating one of the structural elements to the final design requires space, whether it for the physical framing of the weathering canopy, or the lengthy access ramps of the pedestrian underpass.   Project Cost A key component of any major design, our team is committed to optimizing road user safety while minimizing the total project costs. This relates to vital design considerations such as material selection, major intersection changes, and infrastructure upgrades.   Emergency and Maintenance Access On the East side of the corridor, two existing access points exist for emergency access to the UBC Tennis and Robert F. Osbourne centers, and to the Thunderbird Fields maintenance shed. The proposed design will need to account for these access points, and seamlessly integrate them into the proposed design.  Transit Facilities There are currently two bus stops along the East Mall corridor for the 68 UBC Exchange / Westbrook Village bus route. The proposed design will need to incorporate these stops, and also include provisions for rerouting during construction.  On-street Parking While one of the key project objectives is to incentivize a mode shift towards sustainable modes, sufficient on-street parking must be retained in certain areas adjacent to the Tamarack House and Logan Lane Townhouses.  Construction Considerations     Accommodating all forms of traffic, both vehicular and active, along East Mall during the construction phase of the project needs to be considered during the design phase. Rerouting and construction techniques should be considered to minimize the impact on the UBC community. Additionally, noise and social complaints should have a plan to minimize the total impact on the existing community. Further, easements may need to be obtained during the construction phase for residential buildings in the area. 1.5 Team Member Contributions Team Member (Student #) Contributions Kristian Biela (30167167)  Primary Drafter – Plan View, X-Section, Utilities, Greenspace  Greenspace Design  Stormwater Management Dylan Galovich (28829877)  Project Background/ Site Overview  Project Objectives  Stormwater Management  Groundwater and Drainage Dylan Grier (48529168)  Bike Canopy Design & Drawing  Road Base Design  Executive Summary & Report Formatting  Financial Analysis and Risk Management  Design Criteria Rossi Gu (49859796)  Pedestrian Weathering Canopy Design  Partial Bike Canopy Design  Structural Foundation & Connection Design, Drawing Set Ben Maquignaz (31688161)  Roundabout Design & AutoTurn Analysis  Traffic Forecasting  Construction Schedule  Site Visit and documentation  Waste Disposal & Recycling Plan Steve Martin (34447169)  Multi-modal, Ped X-ing Design  Pick-Up/Drop-off Lane Design  Synchro Modelling  Safety Considerations – sightlines, speeds  Signage & Pavement Markings Drawing Set  TMM Classification Braeden McCowan (90201617)  Construction Planning, Requirements, Sequencing  Permitting & Anticipated Issues  Service Life Maintenance Plan  Class C Cost Estimate     2.0 Key Design Components Team 11 has developed a design for the East Mall corridor that achieves all identified preliminary design criteria specified in the previous section. A concise summary of the general design rationale and how the proposed design mitigates the design constraints outlined in Section 1.4 is provided in Table 1 below.  Table 1 Design Constraints and Rationale Design Constraint Rationale Integration with Stadium Neighborhood  Fully compatible with the proposed stadium plan road alignment;  Incorporating new bike parking nearby that may accommodate for TDM for parking reduction of stadium residential usage. Space Constraints  Reoptimizing limited space along the corridor into green space;  Reoptimizing space usage at Agronomy Road to increase sightlines and increase aesthetic appeal;  Incorporating a pedestrian weathering canopy with limited spatial impacts along Agronomy Road;  Restructuring the limited right of way along East Mall to prioritize active modes over private vehicles. Project Cost  Hold paramount public safety while minimizing project costs by selecting appropriate materials and construction methods. Emergency and Maintenance Access  Integration of access points to both the tennis facility emergency access and to the field maintenance shed from East Mall. Transit Facilities  Retaining the current placement of bus stops along the corridor. On-street Parking  Retaining most on-street parking near residential facilities;  Removing parking to improve crossing sightlines, improve vulnerable road user safety, align with UBC mode shift targets. Construction Considerations  The key components of the construction plan, including sequencing, traffic management, noise reduction, and social complaints are addressed in the Construction Planning section of this report The following sections describe each component of the proposed design in detail, including their respective design rationale and development methodology.      2.1 Road Design The proposed roadway for the East Mall Redesign reimagines the wasted boulevard area by repurposing the greenspace into more a functionally sustainable configuration and converts the traffic operations into a 2-lane, 2-way unseparated roadway with on-street parking in certain areas.  2.1.1 Traffic Forecasting and Synchro Modelling Synchro 11 models were developed to compare the proposed design to the existing condition of East Mall. Existing volumes collected from traffic counts were forecasted to future proposed volumes in 2040 through a growth rate of 1% and new trips generated through the proposed Stadium Neighbourhood development. A full sample calculation of these volumes is provided in Appendix E. These modelling results were used for a direct comparison between LOS performance at key intersections along the corridor and justify the implementation of new traffic control, including these key outputs:  A NBL turning lane at Stadium Road is required to accommodate the forecasted volumes due to the planned Stadium Neighbourhood development;    Removing the left turn lanes at FP Innovations and Eagles Drive have no major impact on delays along the corridor;   At East Mall and Thunderbird Boulevard, a roundabout performs slightly worse than an optimized traffic signal, however Team 11 recommends proceeding with a roundabout (See Section 2.2.2); and   At East Mall and Agronomy Road, retaining stop-control with future volumes does not result in a significant change to performance.  A sample Synchro report used to determine measures of effectiveness for the intersections along the corridor can be found in Appendix D. 2.1.2 Typical Cross-Sections The road has been designed to meet the City of Vancouver Engineering Design Guidelines, including a 2.5% crown, 3.5m driving lanes, and 2.5m on-street parking lanes. A typical cross section for the road can be found in Drawing No. 14 in Appendix A.     2.1.3 Sub-grade Cross Section As stated by the City of Vancouver Engineering Design Guidelines (2019), this roadway is classified as a “Higher Zoned Collector” (> 100,000 trips/year). This standard specifies that the road by decreasing elevation will have a minimum of 50 mm Superpave Surface Mix, 90 mm Superpave Base Mix, 150 mm of 19 mm Crushed Granular Base and 300 mm of 75 mm Crushed Granular Sub-Base. The standard cross section of the road can be found on Drawing No. 14 in Appendix A and the Figure below.  Figure 2: Typical Road Base Sub-grade 2.1.4 Signage and Pavement Markings The Signage and Pavement Marking Drawing Package can be found in Appendix A, Drawings no.7-13. This drawing package includes roadway, navigation, and multi-use path signage as indicated in the latest edition of the MoTI’s Manual of Standard Traffic Signage and Pavement Markings. 2.2 Intersection Design 2.2.1 Stadium Road The intersection incorporates a new lane alignment heading northbound due to the proposed pick-up/drop-off lane that will also serve as a traffic calming measure. Signage along the NB approach will be supplied to illustrate this new alignment, as well as a navigation signage indicating the presence of the drop-off lane. The NBL turning lane has been retained due to the forecasted traffic volumes from the     Stadium Neighborhood development, and the existing crosswalk has been retained and upgraded per the specifications in Section 2.3.3. The plan view of this intersection can be found in Drawing No. 2 in Appendix A, and a sample of the intersection is provided in Figure 3.  Figure 3: Stadium Road Intersection 2.2.2 Thunderbird Boulevard The Thunderbird Boulevard Intersection is receiving a full overhaul and be redesigned from the ground up as a low-speed roundabout. Due to the wide lanes in both directions, there was ample room to fit a roundabout that would calm traffic and increase flow. The roundabout features a 5.5m radius center circle with a 2.0m apron around the outside. This ensures that large semi-trailers that frequent the forestry buildings can traverse the roundabout. Using AutoCAD’s AutoTurn software, we were able to optimize the traffic circle for this situation. There are pedestrian crosswalks on all four sides, and refuge islands are available at the center point of each crosswalk to ensure pedestrians feel safe, which has been designed in accordance with the CoV Standard Details. The large multi-use path crosses on the east side of the intersection and allows continuity through the intersection for anyone using the path.  While there is a slight decrease in performance compared to preserving a signalized intersection, there are several benefits to the roundabout that lead to it being the superior alternative. Most importantly, it increases the safety of roundabout users on all modes of transportation. There are fewer severe conflict     points that can lead to KSI collisions (angle and rear-ends). It also helps work towards the goal of traffic-calming, as it encourages a speed reduction, while still allowing for traffic flow at an appropriate LOS through peak hours. The plan view of this intersection can be found in Drawing No. 5 in Appendix A, and a sample plan view is provided in Figure 4 below.  Figure 4: Thunderbird Roundabout Configuration 2.2.3 Agronomy Road The Agronomy Road intersection remains largely unchanged from the existing stop-controlled configuration; however, the new design is centered around safety improvements. To improve sightlines and pedestrian visibility, the large tree on the southeast corner is set to be replaced with low-rising vegetation. Further, new tree(s) will be planted on the northeast corner along with a new alignment for the sidewalks, pending an arborist analysis of the area. The sidewalk on the southeast corner is narrow and will be widened to accommodate increased foot traffic to and from the area due to the proposed multi-use path. Additionally, new upgraded lighting will be installed and signage for cyclists will be installed to alert them of the new multi-use path.  The proposed configuration has been provided in Appendix A, Drawing 6; and a stripped down sample is provided in Figure 5.      Figure 5: Agronomy Road Intersection 2.3 Multi-Modal Design 2.3.1 Multi-use Path The keystone design element of the proposed design is the multi-use path that extends from W16th to Thunderbird Boulevard. The 5m wide, asphalt-paved pathway is warranted via vehicle and pedestrian volumes under the BC Active Transportation Guidelines (BCATDG) for the East Mall corridor, and connects the heart of campus to Westbrook Village, the future Stadium Neighborhood, and the Thunderbird Sports Fields. The BCATDG (2019) and UBC’s Design Guidelines were primarily referenced in the development of the multi-use path. 2.3.1.1 Subgrade Design As stated by the City of Vancouver Engineering Design Guidelines (2019), this multi-use pathway is classified as a “protected bicycle lane.” This standard specifies that the pathway by decreasing elevation will have a minimum of 50mm MMCD Upper Course #2/9.5mm and 150mm Granular Base. The grass median does not require a standard sub-grade and will be constructed as fill. The standard cross section of the pathway can be found on Drawing No. 14 in Appendix A and the figure below.      Figure 6: Typical Multi-use Path Sub-grade 2.3.1.2 Pavement Markings and Signage The path is separated into separated 2.5m N/S lanes though pavement markings and is shared use for bicycles, pedestrians, and other active modes. Navigation kiosks in accordance with UBC’s Design Guidelines are planned along the length of the multi-use path, with implementation being deferred to align with the development of the new stadium neighbourhood. The pavement marking and signage drawing package, shown in Appendix A Drawings no. 7-13, can be referenced for the full length of the path. 2.3.1.3 Lighting and Safety Upgraded pedestrian-priority lighting fixtures (Saturn 2 Cutoff Luminaires) will be installed 35 m apart, in reference to UBC’s Design Guidelines for Pedestrian Priority corridors. These fixtures are designated for ‘Pedestrian Priority’ zones, which the East Mall corridor falls on the boundary. This will provide a safe connector from the heart of campus to the Westbrook Village residential area. Rest benches are provided along the length of the multi-use path for accessibility of all vulnerable users. 2.3.1.4 Additional Considerations The multi-use path can provide additional benefits to the community through the integration of decorative art, or pavement designs that can highlight UBC’s commitment to equity and diversity. Further, collaboration with First Nations communities can be explored for naming and culture integration through art displays or banners.     2.3.2 Covered Bicycle Parking The bicycle canopy is located North of Stadium Road on the East side of East Mall. The goal of this area is to provide users of the sports facilities a safe place to house their bicycles. The addition of this structure will further incentivize mode shift which aligns with UBC’s 2050 goals. Further providing bicycle parking can act as a transportation demand measure which may reduce the amount of vehicle parking spaces in the new stadium neighbourhood. Full details of this structure of this design can be found in Section 2.8.2 Bicycle Canopy. 2.3.3 Crosswalk Upgrades Integration with the proposed multi-use path is of utmost importance for the two major mid-block crossing locations along the corridor at Stadium Road and at Eagles Drive. The ramp letdowns have been designed in conformance with the City of Vancouver’s ‘Single Curb Ramp’ standard detail, which lead off into standard zebra pavement markings. The Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) detail incorporates a push button, required signage, and solar charging equipment; these RRFB units are warranted under a study by Ashur & Alhassan (2015) including expected crosses per day and vehicle volumes along the roadway. The mid-block crosswalk designs are accentuated by parking offsets to increase pedestrian visibility. The RRFB detail design, prepared originally by Kerr Wood Leidal for the Dsitrcit of Saanich, has been provided in Figure 7.       Figure 7: RRFB Detail 2.3.4 Bus Stops  The corridor design will retain bus stops in their current positions on East Mall at the Eagle Dr crossing. This will eliminate unneeded planning with TransLink, public consultation, and confusion for bus users and bus drivers. TransLink will still be informed of the project as a stakeholder and engaged with as needed to satisfy any requirements for upgrading a bus route corridor. Bus stops will be upgraded to 20m long (vs. 15m existing) to provide ample room for buses and possible future bus upgrades, as the width of the roadway is being constrained along the corridor. The bus stops are illustrated as a part of the standard detail designs in Appendix A, Drawing 23. 2.4 Pick-up / Drop-off Lane The one-way, ~60m pick-up/drop-off lane is located on the Northbound side of East Mall and has been designed to accommodate the significant volume of thunderbird field users. Consisting of 18 drop-off spaces oriented at 45°, the wide 2.7m stall width is optimal for dropping off children, while the 5.8m stall depth in accordance with City of Vancouver design standards. The 15-minute timed restrictions will     be accentuated by enforcement during peak hours, and 4 additional spaces have been provided on the SB side of the street. The dedicated drop-off lane has a 1.5m buffer from the travel lanes and has been designed to maximize safety of the vulnerable field users. No stopping / blocking signage and pavement markings are integrated along the lane to maximize efficiency, as shown in the Signage and Pavement markings drawing package. A sample overview of the drop-off lane is shown in Figure 8.  Figure 8: Pick-up Drop-Off Lane 2.5 Vehicle On-Street Parking Parking capacity was slightly reduced to increase sight lines and pedestrian safety at all intersections with crosswalks; a sample calculation of the existing vs. required sightline distances for each crossing is provided in Appendix E. There are now 94 total stalls along the corridor, reduced from 107. A priority was placed on retaining on-street parking along all sections of East Mall with residences directly adjacent. All spots remain pay-parking, with the exception of four 15-minute drop-off spots directly across from the proposed drop-off lane. On-street parking spots are all 2.5 meters wide and 5.5 m long (in accordance with the CoV Design Guidelines), providing ample room for safe ingress and egress from the vehicle. A buffer zone has been provided between parked cars and pedestrian pathways on both sides of the roadway, further increasing the safety of both modes of transportation. 2.6 Stormwater Management The existing Storm Water Sewer System at work area is sufficient in handling existing inflows of the redesign. A description of the work undertaken includes removing and replacing existing single and twin     inlet catch basins and PVC leads that run from catch basin to manhole riser. New catch basins in conjunction with the CoV’s Standard Detail S11.3 are to be installed at each side of an intersection, at pedestrian crosswalks, and at a maximum distance of every 75ft. Each catch basin is connected to the existing storm sewer system with 200mm PVC SDR35 pipe with a 2% slope as per CoV standards. Refer to Appendix A plan view drawings for location of catch basins, and for standard details. 2.6.1 Groundwater & Drainage  Stormwater management is required for all new development projects on UBC campus. Projects are required to incorporate design aspects that reduce the quantity of water that would flow offsite to slow the rate and amount of water that leaves the campus. Current stormwater management infrastructure on the UBC campus include large detention tanks, wet and dry ponds, and green infrastructure such as bioswales, rain gardens, and green roofs. UBC created the Integrated Stormwater Management Plan to:  Reduce the flow of water off campus;  Reduce the impacts of stormwater flows off campus; and  Maintain or enhance water quality at campus boundaries to that it meets or exceed municipal best practices. There are several underground utilities on the roadway. However, the deeper utilities (1.0-1.5m and below) are not a major concern. The existing Storm Water infrastructure is outlined in green and includes Storm manholes, mains, and miscellaneous. The 300mm to 900mm sized mains are buried 1.5m to 3.0m down on East Mall, north of University Boulevard. Other buried utilities include, electrical, communications at a depth of 0.6m, and natural gas lines at a depth of 50mm to 100mm. Sanitary Sewers are at a dept of 1.5m to 3.0m and ranging from 200mm to 450mm. The existing and proposed underground utilities are shown in the detailed design drawing package in Appendix A, Drawings 2-6. The scope of the project does not require a full hydraulic analysis of the site. The existing Storm Water Sewer System is sufficient in handling existing inflows of the redesign.  Incorporating improved landscaping and engineered green infrastructure will reduce the inflows entering the system. A     description of the work undertaken includes removing and replacing existing single and twin inlet catch basins and PVC leads that run from catch basin to manhole riser. The City of Vancouver Engineering Design Manual outlines the following:  Double catch basins with leaf catchers (side inlets) placed at all major low points (provide alternative overland route, system, or capacity to handle major storm where possible);  Not located within painted crosswalks or curb ramps;  Located at the beginning of the curb return or higher side of crosswalk;  Prevent overflows to driveways, bicycle lanes, private properties, boulevards, and sidewalks;  All catch basins located at low points should provide a double catch basin with leaf catcher (side inlet) if adjacent to treed boulevard. Table 2: Catch Basin Type and Spacing Type Catchment Area / Spacing Minimum Preferred Maximum Typical Catch Basin Catchment Area New / Reconstructed Roads up to 4% Grade 250 sq.m 500 sq.m 600 sq.m Typical Catch Basin Spacing All Roads 60m - 150m  Table 3: Catch Basin Design Characteristic Requirement Diameter Size 200mm Type PVC SDR35 Slope 2% Depth 1.5m Length 30m Max. The final design incorporates 45 new catch basins that are connected to the existing storm water sewer system. 200mm PVC SDR35 Pipe connects the new catch basin to the existing manhole riser along the corridor. In total, approximately 900m of 200mm PVC pipe is required for the development. The catch basins are to be standard that conform to the City of Vancouver Standard Detail. To calculate the design flow for the drainage area, the rational method was used, which can be found in Appendix E. The site area was segmented into eight distinct sub catchment areas based on the normalized elevation change, size, and land use. The final drawing package contains the Drainage Plan on Sheet 21.         Figure 9: Drainage Sub catchments Runoff Coefficients vary based on the slope of the ground, type of ground cover, surface, and development population density. The varying coefficient values are determined by the permeance of the ground surface. The least permeable surface resulted in the greatest run off, and thus a greater C value. The relevant Runoff Coefficients used for the sub catchment areas are outlined in Table 4.  Table 4: Runoff Coefficients Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient, C Average (2-7%) Lawns, Sandy Soil 0.13 Average (2-7%) Lawns, Heavy Soil  0.18 Drives and Walks 0.80 Asphalt Streets 0.83 Concrete Streets 0.88  2.6.2 Green Infrastructure The purpose of green infrastructure is to improve water quality, reduce storm runoff, increase aesthetics, and improve ecology of the area. There are several types of engineered green infrastructure that are to be included in the final design, such as green landscaping through a combination of swales and rock gardens. Along the corridor, approximately 100m2 of greenspace is to be added. The infrastructure will promote stormwater detention and disposal and retention through infiltration and     evapotranspiration. Table 5 and Table 6 indicate Green Infrastructure Design Targets, and typical costs, respectively. Table 5: Green Infrastructure Design Targets Objective Target Standard Volume Reduction Retain the first 24mm of rainfall (50% of the 6 month – 24-hour return period storm, 70% of the average annual rainfall volume) Infiltrate, evapotranspire and reuse rainwater to the greatest extent practicable.    Water Quality Treat the first 48mm of rainfall (6 month – 24-hour return period storm, 90% of the average annual rainfall volume) Remove 80% of Total Suspended Solids for particles > 50microns(1); the total concentration of sediment can be no more than 75mg/L(2). Table 6: Green Infrastructure Type and Cost Type Cost ($ / sq. ft) Absorbent Landscaping - Infiltration Swales / Trenches 50 Rain Gardens 20  2.7 Landscape and Greenspace Design  One of the main features of our design is the incorporation of greenspace and aesthetic landscaping. Although the landscape design will be contracted to a landscape design firm, we would like to set the precedent and the following guidelines for the firm to reference. The landscaped medians will consist of grass, trees, shrubs, and other plants. In addition to these typical features, our design will include rock gardens within the medians to promote groundwater infiltration and reduce the amount of runoff to the storm sewer system. Perforated pipe such as Big-O pipe will be installed beneath landscaped medians for two purposes; to collect surface water and distribute it into the ground, and to allow excess groundwater to drain into the pipe to reduce unnecessary pore pressure. The perforated pipe will allow all excess water to flow into a retention tank to be used for irrigation or other purposes if treated. No water runoff from the road will be collected in these retention tanks to avoid contamination from oil and other automotive fluids, or other hazardous waste which can be transported from the road into the     drainage system. This groundwater retention system provides a solution for the underground water storage option which SEEDs is researching for the Stadium Neighborhood to reduce pore pressure in the adjacent cliffs. In addition to these design objectives, the design team suggests the list of following plants and landscaping features to achieve the aesthetic goals of creating a natural environment local to the BC coast:  Salal’s  Ferns  Rock Gardens (4in-24in diameter)  Yews  Cherry Blossoms  Lily of the Valley  Grasses  Red Maples  Bark Mulch  Evergreen Trees A majority of the planned upgrades at East Mall and Agronomy Road are related to landscaping changes to increase sightlines. An investigation into the large tree outside the Starbucks will be performed to determine to what extent the roots infiltration the structural capacity of the roadway and the nearby building; if this tree can be removed, an arborist will be hired to examine the additional impacts and help determine what best practice landscaping can replace the tree. For the north-east corner, the separation between green spaces will be removed to stream pedestrians through one route onto the crosswalks, which will help with sightlines of pedestrians during busy peak hours. A sample of this new landscaping configuration has been provided in Figure 5 above. We will be removing trees in favor of creating a more efficient green landscaped corridor; rock gardens, swales, and flowers are better utilized to meet City of Vancouver and UBC standards.   2.8 Structural Designs 2.8.1 Pedestrian Weathering Canopy  With the goal of improving pedestrian walking experience on campus, the weathering canopy design was decided to be incorporated into this project based on its likelihood to be used, the overall improvement of pedestrian safety, the ease of construction and its relatively low capital cost comparing     with the pedestrian underground tunnel option. The sections below describe the key aspects of the Detailed Weathering Canopy Design and analysis.  The structures are located on the north side of the roadway in front of the McGavin and Donald Rix buildings, with an opening left in between the two buildings to provide vehicle access for emergency vehicles and trash trucks (see in the figure below). The length of the canopy adjacent to the McGavin Building is 36m and the canopy adjacent to the Donald Rix building is 32m. Both structures have a width of 5m and a minimum height of 2.5m with 1:12 roof slope. The detailed drawings for the structural canopy are provided in Appendix A.   Figure 10: Weathering Canopy Location and Vehicle Access Opening 2.8.2 Bicycle Canopy The goal of this area is to provide users of the sports facilities a safe place to house their bicycles. A secondary objective is to further incentivize mode shift in throughout the campus. The bicycle canopy is located North of Stadium Road on the East side of East Mall. This cantilever canopy structure rests on a 4 m wide 16 m long and 250 mm deep concrete pad. The structure’s dimensions are a 5m in width and a minimum height of 2.5m with 1:12 roof slope. The canopy covers twenty of UBC’s standard exterior bicycle racks (Model: SU20-E-G-CB). Full details of this structure can be found on Drawing No. 16 in Appendix A.     2.8.3 Structural Member Sizing Both the pedestrian and bicycle canopies’ structural members are steel hollow sections sized based on the SAP2000 modeling results, assuming the specified yield strength of the steel members being 300MPa. For each type of the members (columns, longitudinal beams and transverse beams), the maximum design loads (axial, shear and bending moment) were extracted from the analysis report, and then checked against various failure mechanisms.  For the columns, the following failure mechanisms were considered:  Local buckling  Shear resistance  Cross-sectional strength  Overall member strength (85%) For the beams, the following failure mechanisms were considered:  Moment resistance for laterally supported beams  Shear resistance The table below summarizes the final section sizes for the structural members: Table 7: Member Sizing  Member  Weathering Canopy  Bicycle Canopy    Section  Utilization  Section  Utilization   Column  HSS102x102x8.0  85.0%  HSS152x152x13  81.2%  Longitudinal Beam  HSS114x114x4.8  75.4%  HSS114x114x4.8  62.0%  Transverse Beam  HSS178x178x6.4  68.9%  HSS178x178x6.4  71.3%  For the detailed sizing and structural design calculations, see in Appendix E arranged using MathCAD 20.  2.8.4 Foundation Design The canopy column foundation is a concrete pedestal sitting underground with base plates, anchor bolts and welds connecting the concrete and the steel column. Comparing the force resultant in SAP2000 model, the loading difference between the corner columns and the side columns is small. In order to save the effort for designing and construction, only the side column foundations will be designed in detail, and the corner foundations are going to use the same design since the demand in the side column foundation is more critical and governs the design.     The design loads for the foundation were obtained from the SAP2000 analysis report. The structural support was modeled as a “fixed” support as the foundations are intended to be designed as moment connections. All the concrete used for foundation design are assumed to have a specified compressive strength of at least 25MPa, and the reinforcing steel has a specified yield strength of 400MPa. The failure mechanisms considered are: For concrete pedestal:  Concrete compressive strength  Concrete (column) moment resistance  Combined axial and moment resistance  For base plate: - “m” edge check based on compression - “n” edge check based on compression  For weld connection: - Shear strength of weld metal - Shear strength of base metal - Minimum and maximum weld size requirements  For cast-in anchor group:  Anchor rod tensile strength  Concrete tensile breakout strength  Concrete pullout strength  Concrete side-face blowout strength  Anchor rod shear strength  Concrete shear breakout strength  Concrete pryout strength  Combined tension and shear strength  Both the pedestrian and bicycle canopies’ foundation consist of 500mm deep concrete pedestal (400 x 400mm plan dimension) below ground, a 300mm x 300mm x 22mm base plate, and 4-3/4” anchor bolts connecting all parts together.  The dimension checks for the geometry of the base place, anchor bolts and pedestal, according to CSA A23.3 Annex D, were conducted both manually and by Hilti PROFIS (web version), and the below is a schematic drawing of the foundation design generated by Hilti PROFIS:  Figure 11: Canopy Foundation Design Arrangement     For the detailed sizing and structural design calculations, see in Appendix E arranged using MathCAD 20.  2.8.5 Shear Connection The connection between the beams and the columns were designed as shear connections transferring shear forces only (no moment transfer). Modeled as “pin” connections in SAP2000, the analysis result provides the factored shear demands, and the connections were designed based on these values. The failure mechanisms considered are:  Bolt shear resistance  Bolted member bearing capacity  Block shear resistance  Member rupture capacity Between longitudinal beams and columns, the shear connection consists of an L89x89x9.5 angle with both legs bolted to the face of HSS sections using 2-1/2” A325M bolts in a single row. For the transverse beams and the columns, 2-10mm thick base plates, a gusset plate which is to be shop welded to the two base plates, and 2 rows of 2-1/2” A325M bolts are used to connect to the face of HSS sections.  The two shear connections are different because the canopy roof has a 1:12 slope for drainage purpose. A PVC drainage channel will be installed on the long side of the slope end, and then connect to a vertical drainage pipe and a concrete splash pad on the ground level. For the detailed sizing and structural design calculations, see Appendix E arranged using MathCAD 20.  3.0 Design Criteria  3.1 Design Loadings Team 11 completed thorough research to ensure that all design criterion used for the project was up to date and correct. To better organize this criterion it was broken up into two main components of project disciplines, Transportation and Structural.     3.1.1 Transportation For the road design, the main design loadings considered are the roadway and the multi-use path loadings. These loadings for the roadway are specified in the City of Vancouver Engineering Design Guidelines (2019). Roadway loadings to are to be designed to the standard of "Higher Zoned Collector" which is greater than 100,000 trips per year. The loadings for the multi-use path are specified in the BC Active Transportation Design Guidelines (2019). Multi-use path loadings are to be designed to meet greater than 4000 motor vehicles a day. Other safety considerations were met by Suleman & Alhassan (2015) where Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) will be designed to meet greater than 800 peak vehicle volumes, 30-75 crossings per hour. 3.1.2 Structural For the canopy structures, the primary design loads considered are the dead load D, snow load S, wind load W, and seismic load E(see values in the table below). The dead load includes both the structural self-weight and the permanent weight of the objects on the canopy roof, such as the plants (see in section 3.1.2.1) and drainage conduits. The snow load, wind load and seismic load are calculated based on National Building Code of Canada (2015) Division B – Section 4.1 – Structural Loads and Procedures. The snow load and wind load are calculated manually considering all the parameters mentioned in the NBCC-2015 codes. The seismic load, previously estimated using Earthquake Load Calculator 2020 during preliminary design stage, was now calculated in detail based on NBCC Earthquake loads during detailed design stage. 3.1.2.1 Green Roof Modules With the addition of new weathering canopies to the UBC campus, it provides the opportunity for a green and sustainable design. The ‘Tree Canopy Project’ is a research project by multiple faculty members at UBC to incorporate green storm water infrastructure into high density urban spaces. Our canopy design can integrate the “Sedum Roof” with Fixodrain ® XD 20 to capture stormwater runoff (Tree Canopy Project 2018). This roof module is still in the prototype phase to research the     effectiveness, but the end goal is to incorporate these into UBC’s Sustainability and Green Policy. The impact of these modules to the structural integrity of the canopy is minimal as it has an estimated superimposed dead load of less than 2 kPa. 3.1.2.2 Load Combinations According to NBCC Division B Section 4.1 Structural Loads and Procedures, the load combinations considered for structural analysis are: Table 8: Design Loads  Dead Load, D (kN)   SW+2.25kPa  Snow Load, S (kPa)   1.8   Wind Load, W (kPa)   1.38   Seismic Load, E (%DL)   40%   For the detailed sizing and structural design calculations, see Appendix E arranged using MathCAD 20.   1.4D  1.25D + 1.0S  1.25D + 0.4W  1.25D + 1.5S   1.25D + 1.5S + 0.4W  1.25D + 1.4W  1.25D + 1.4W + 1.5S  1.0D + 1.0E  1.0D + 1.0E +0.25S Where D is the dead load of the structure, S is the snow load, W is the wind load, and E is the earthquake load, all calculated in accordance with the NBCC.  3.2 Adopted Design Life 3.2.1 Transportation The guiding criteria was design life of road which is referenced in the UBC Technical Guidelines. It states that the minimum design life for all classifications of roads must be 20 years.  3.2.2 Structural The guiding criteria was design life of all structural elements are also referenced in the UBC Technical Guidelines. It states that the minimum design life for all structural elements must be 100 years. 3.3 Standards and Software Packages The following codes and standards primarily referenced in this design are:      City of Vancouver Engineering Design Guidelines (2019) + Standard Details  UBC Vancouver Campus Plan Part 3: Design Guidelines (2010)  BC Active Transportation Design Guidelines (2019)  CSA A23.3 (2014), CSA S16 (2019), Handbook of Steel Construction – 11th Edition  Manual of Standard Traffic Signs & Pavement Markings, MoTI (2000)  UBC Exterior Signage Standards and Guidelines The following software’s used to complete this design are:  AutoCAD: Drawing Preparation, AutoTurn Roundabout Analysis  Synchro 11: Traffic Modelling, Intersection Design (see Figure 12)  SAP 2000: Structural Analysis  Figure 12: Sample of Existing Synchro Model 3.4 Other Design Aspects 3.4.1 Economic One of the main project objectives are to minimize costs and maximize safety for all roadway users. To enhance this criterion our team has created a versatile cost estimate found in Section 4.6. Following this cost estimate, a Benefit Cost Analysis was completed by BC Ministry of Transportation’s (MOTI) shortben.xls spread sheet. This spreadsheet considers a comparison of the proposed project and a ‘do-nothing’ scenario. Some of the key considerations in this spreadsheet to calculate a benefit cost ratio are safety, travel times, project costs, maintenance, and discount rates. The benefit cost ratio outputted from the sheet is 1.16 which indicates this project should proceed from an economic standpoint, and     that the user benefits outweigh the total project costs. The Net Present Value, using a conservative interest rate of 6%, was determined to be ~$ 500,000. The full benefit cost analysis spreadsheet developed for the East Mall Redesign can be found alongside the Class C cost estimate in Appendix C.  3.4.2 Environmental An environmental impact assessment should be undertaken to ensure that over this projects lifetime any potential harmful effects will be analyzed. Aligning with UBC’s sustainability goals, this project main environmental design criteria is to increase user mode shift, incorporate green infrastructure and enhance stormwater management. We assume that there will be opportunities for environmental impact mitigation throughout the construction period; this is defined in Section 4.1.2 Waste Disposal + Recycling Plan. Environmental sustainability will be completed by following the Environmental Mitigation Procedures provided by the Government of BC. These steps include:   Establish the team involved in identifying environmental values;   Identify the boundaries of the assessment area;   Identify the impacts associated with the proposed activity and the corresponding impact boundary;   Identify a comprehensive set of environmental values and associated components for the assessment area;   Identify a relevant subset of environmental values and associated components for the assessment area;   Provide a rationale;   Submit information to the Province. 3.4.3 Societal Since UBC lays on the unseated grounds of the Musqueam territory, there is a potential for societal issues during permitting and designing. All measures must be taken with the respective parties to ensure that appropriate measures are conducted during these stages of the project. Furthermore, the staff and students of UBC must be considered as they are the primary users of the campus. It is a top priority to design a functional corridor that will serve the UBC community for years to come.     3.4.4 Regulatory There are multiple regulatory bodies within the scope of this project. For the East Mall Redesign Project, the primary regulatory bodies are listed below, and an expanded list is available in 4.1.1 Permitting.  1. Federal: Transport Canada  2. Provincial: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure  3. Municipal: City of Vancouver  4. Local: UBC and the University Endowment Lands 3.4.5 Risk Management Team 11 completed a risk management workshop in March 2021 to create a risk register for the project. This workshop outlined the potential risks of the project along with the magnitude of risk, likelihood, and consequence rating. Afterwards, control systems were brainstormed to minimize these risks. An excerpt of the developed sheet is shown in the figure below.   Figure 13: Excerpt from Risk Register 4.0 Construction Planning There are multiple stages needed before construction can start. The following sections detail the duties required by the Project Manager such as construction requirements, permits, methods, schedule, and costs.     4.1 Construction Requirements 4.1.1 Permitting Permits will need to be created and sent off to the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) six to twelve months before build start; but must not exceed 12 months due to expiry. The redesign of East Mall will require permits at different stages of the build project. The required permits are shown in Table 9. Table 9: Breakdown of Required Permits and Justifications Permit Key Stakeholder Group Rationale Archaeological Impact Assessment  Government of BC  Musqueam Indian Band Earth removal on indigenous soil (Musqueam Territory) has potential for unburying indigenous artifacts. Underground Conduit Extension  UBC and other AHJs  BC Hydro  TELUS  FortisBC Conduit Extension for electrical wiring to Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons Tree and Root Removal/Relocation  UBC and other AHJs  Local Arborist Companies Removal of boulevard along East Mall Multiple Traffic Control Permits  UBC and other AHJs  Local Flagging companies Removal of boulevard, road realignment, underground conduit extension, construction of round-a-bout. Civil Permit  UBC and other AHJs  Contracted construction company Roundabout Construction Civil Permit  UBC and other AHJs  Contracted construction company Curb-line Construction Civil Permit  UBC and other AHJs  Contracted construction company  BC Hydro  TELUS  FortisBC Excavation, removal, and restoration of boulevard. Permit designs will need to be prioritized as permit approvals are needed before the detailed design can be Issued for Construction (IFC).  4.1.2 Waste Disposal + Recycling Plan The nature of the upgrade of the corridor along East Mall requires the disposal of significant amounts of concrete, asphalt, and timber. Integrating the removal of these materials with the construction plan and     ensuring facilities can take the material in a timely manner help both keep the project on track and uphold our commitment to sustainability. The asphalt and concrete to be removed are largely recyclable, and municipalities are actively requesting used asphalt and concrete for reuse in new road paving efforts. Per the City of Vancouver’s “Expression of Interest for Select Waste Concrete and Asphalt Disposal” (2020), loads of asphalt and concrete greater than 100 tons will be accepted at $0 per ton to fill this demand.  The Government of British Columbia has guidelines laid out for the potential uses of waste wood products, which is of interest to the East Mall project due to the boulevard street trees that will be removed. Waste wood products can be transformed into ‘hog fuel’ or wood pellets, and then incinerated for power generation at energy plants. This becomes a particularly appealing option for this project, given that the Bioenergy Research Demonstration Facility on UBC’s campus accepts such products, and is mere minutes away. So long as the material is appropriately ground down, it can be used to heat buildings on the UBC campus. With these measures in place, we are able to significantly reduce our environmental footprint while disposing of waste in a timely manner, all while decreasing the cost of the project. 4.1.3 Traffic Management Plan The 2020 Traffic Management Manual for Work on Roadways (TMM) was used to categorize the East Mall Redesign project into an Initial Assessment Category and a Project Risk Analysis Category. These rankings provide an overall project category that influences what required Traffic Management is required. The project scored a 24 on the initial assessment and a 26 on the risk analysis, categorizing the project as “Category 2”. The required measures have been integrated into the construction sequencing described in Section 4.2; refer to the 2020 TMM for a full list of Category 2 requirements.     4.2 Construction Sequence The Construction Plan will be broken up into 3 Phases: South Bound Lane Construction, North Bound Lane Construction, and Roundabout Installation at the Thunderbird Intersection. The Construction Schedule is expected to take a total of 69 days. 4.2.1 Phase 1 – South Bound Lane Construction The first phase will commence with 2-way traffic set-up in the north bound lane and the closure of the south bound lane. Construction will first be completed on the south bound lane. Any tree removal will be completed and then the asphalt and median will be removed. Levelling and subgrade will be completed, followed by paving, then painting and landscaping. Streetlights, signage, and RRFB units will be installed as the final step. 4.2.2 Phase 2 – Greenspace Construction on Northbound Lane In the second phase, the newly completed south bound lane will be reopened as 2-way traffic and the north bound lane will be closed. The second phase ends with the completion of the bike path and greenspace. The asphalt as well as existing bike path will be removed and the landscaping for the median and subgrade for the multi-use path will be completed. This will be followed by electrical work for the path lighting. Finally, paving for the pullout lane, bike path, and greenspace will be completed and the north bound lane will be reopened. 4.2.3 Phase 3 – Roundabout Construction at Intersection of Thunderbird Boulevard For Phase Three, the intersection will be closed at Thunderbird Boulevard. South bound and North bound traffic will be re-routed, and the roundabout will be installed, finishing construction via Stadium Road and Eagles Drive and north bound traffic via Agronomy. Traffic lights will be removed at thunderbird intersection and the roundabout will be installed. The intersection will then be reopened. 4.3 Service Life Maintenance Plan For the maintenance plan, there are 6 key actions. The list below details the components of these key actions, and what must be considered for maintaining the proposed East Mall Corridor.     1. Winter Maintenance o Sidewalk Snow Clearing o Bicycle & Pathway Network Snow Clearing o Bicycle Route De-Icing Considerations o Snow Clearing Vehicle 2. Facility Sweeping o Sidewalk Facilities o Bicycle & Multi-Use Path Facilities 3. Surface Conditions & Quality o Sidewalk Facilities o Bicycle Facilities 4. Landscaping & Vegetation Management o Overgrown Grass o Bushes o Tree Branches o Debree Management After Major Storms o Root Barriers to Mitigate Surface Damage  5. Signage & Pavement Markings o Paint o Epoxy o Thermoplastic and Tape 6. Temporary & Special Event Considerations o Route Closures & Major Detours o Proper Signage o Facility Use & Hoarding Management o Provide Fire and Police Dept w/ map route system, along with access points to gates/bollards o Enforce speed limits and other rules of the road o Enforce all trespassing laws for people attempting to enter adjacent private properties   4.4 Anticipated Issues Our main concern is Safety. This is due to heavy machinery and a high density of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. For Traffic management active modes along the corridor must be maintained as well as access to residential, business, and recreation facilities, especially during peak hours. Striking underground utilities is also a cause for concern during excavation. Other issues are complaints that may arise from residents of the area. 4.5 Construction Schedule  The anticipated timeline for the completion of this project is just under 70 days from the first closure to the final intersection opening. It was important to consider the context under which the project was being built, and as such concessions for crew size and productivity were made in accordance with proper social distancing during the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. The sequencing of the construction schedule is described in detail in Section 4.2 above. A full Gantt chart of the proposed project schedule can be found in Appendix B.      4.6 Class C Cost Estimate The Class C cost estimate considered multiple aspects of the construction build, including installation, major and minor material costs including but not limited to asphalt, steel, and conduit. Arborist costs for brushing and tree removal, traffic accommodation, and maintenance costs were also included. The final cost estimate breakdown, showing the major categories of each cost, is shown in Table 10. Table 10: Class C Cost Breakdown Final Estimates: Costs RRFB Units and Civil Work $ 84,000.00 Multi-Modal Path $ 854,000.00 Boulevard Excavation/Fill and Paving $ 639,000.00 Installation of Roundabout $ 161,000.00 Asphalt Road Paving of East Mall Corridor $ 1,023,000.00 Pedestrian Canopy $ 33,000.00 Bicycle Canopy  $ 6,000.00 Drainage Network $ 276,000.00 Arborist $ 65,000.00 Traffic Accommodation $ 87,000.00 Maintenance Plan $ 323,000.00 10% Contingency $ 355,100.00 Total Cost: $ 3,906,100.00 With an added 10% contingency of $355,00.00, the final cost estimate is $3.9 million. Appendix C highlights the full detailed cost estimate breakdown. 5.0 Next Steps This design report represents the final step before construction, and as such the next steps would be to begin applying for the necessary permits for the work required. Notably, many of the required permits have long leads times, and so this should be done in a timely manner to ensure that construction commences swiftly. Additionally, further stakeholder consultation and education can be undertaken to ensure that the community fully understands the context in which this project is being build. Integration with the future     development in the Stadium neighbourhood will be important, as will managing the expectations of residents along East Mall for the construction process. Proactive engagement with these individuals can help to smooth over points of conflict that otherwise may arise due to the ongoing construction. While this report represents the conclusion of Team 11’s scope of work, we would be willing to work further with the client to oversee stakeholder consultation or overcome construction challenges that may arise. It should be noted, however, that many of engineers who have acted as points of contact over the duration of this project will be moving on.      References  Ashur, S. & Alhassan, M. (2015). “Selection of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments at Controlled and Uncontrolled Locations”. Retrieved from: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3079&context=jtrp   BC Active Transportation Design Guide (2019 Edition). Retrieved from:  https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/funding-engagementpermits/grants-funding/cycling-infrastructure-funding/active-transportation-guide/2019-06- 14_bcatdg_compiled_digital.pdf   Benni, J., Macaraig, M., Malmo-Laycock, J., Smith Lea, N. & Tomalty, R. (2019). Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership.  City of Vancouver Engineering Design Manual. (2018). Retreived from: https://bids.vancouver.ca/bidopp/RFA/Documents/PS20181461-CityofVancouver-EngineeringDesignManualFirstEdition2018.PDF  City of Vancouver Standard Detail Drawings. Engineering Services. (2018). Retreived from https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/standard-detail-drawings-storm-and-sanitary-sewers.pdf   Earthquake Load Calculator (2020). Retrieved from: https://www.jabacus.com/engineering/load2015/seismic.php  Environmental Mitigation Policy for B.C. (2014). Retrieved from: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/laws-policies-standards-guidance/environmental-guidance-and-policy/environmental-mitigation-policy  Infrastructure, M. of T. and. (2019, July 10). Transportation Planning Benefit-Cost Analysis. Province of British Columbia. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/transportation-planning/benefit-cost-analysis.   Institute of Transportation Engineers, (2017), Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition  Integrated Stormwater Management Plan. (2017). Retrieved from: https://planning.ubc.ca/sustainability/sustainability-action-plans/integrated-stormwater-management-plan   Land Use Plan. Land Use Plan | UBC Campus & Community Planning. (2015, June 2). https://planning.ubc.ca/planning-development/policies-and-plans/campus-land-use-planning/land-use-plan.   Means Engineering Staff. (2009). RSMeans Estimating Handbook (3rd Edition). John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpRSMEHE01/rsmeans-estimating-handbook/rsmeans-estimating-handbook  Means Engineering Staff. (2009). RSMeans Estimating Handbook (3rd Edition) - 19. Division Thirty-One: Earthwork. John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt009882L1/rsmeans-estimating-handbook/division-thirty-one-earthwork;;  Mishra, S. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) Pilot Project. City of Calgary. (2015).  NBCC 2015 Division B Part 4 Structural Design. (2016, June 28). Ontario: National Research Council.  Road Drainage, Design Alternatives and Maintenance. (2003). Retrieved from: https://fcm.ca/sites/default/files/documents/resources/guide/infraguide-road-drainage-design-alternatives-maintenance-mamp.pdf      Tree Canopy Project. (2018, April 10). Retrieved from: https://ece-treecanopy.sites.olt.ubc.ca/   Transportation Planning Benefit Cost Analysis (2019). Retrieved from: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/transportation-planning/benefit-cost-analysis   UBC Transportation Plan (2014). Retrieved from: https://planning.ubc.ca/sites/planning.ubc.ca/files/documents/transportation/plans/UBCTransportation-Plan-2014_Oct.pdf     UBC Vancouver Campus Plan (2014). Retrieved from: https://planning.ubc.ca/planning-development/policies-and-plans/campus-land-use-planning/vancouver-campus-plan   Weighted Unit Price Averages Based on 2017 Construction Prices. City of Calgary. (2017).  City of Vancouver Expression of Interest for select waste and concrete removal  https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/landfill-concrete-asphalt-disosal-RFEOI.pdf  Options for Wood Waste Use and Disposal Under Provincial Legislation https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/air-land-water/site-permitting-and-compliance/sia/wood_waste_use_management_cheatsheet.pdf  2020 Traffic Management Manual for Work on Roadways (2020). Government of British Columbia. Retrieved from: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-guidelines/traffic-engineering-safety/trafficmanagementmanual/2020trafficmanagementmanual                  Appendix A: Issued for Construction Drawings   EAST MALL RE-DESIGN PROJECT PREPARED FOR: University of British Columbia – UBC SEEDS (Social EcologicalEconomic Development Studies) Sustainability Program 2210 West Mall Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 520 Bates Road, Richmond, BC1. CONSTRUCTION NOTES2. PLAN VIEW #13. PLAN VIEW #24. PLAN VIEW #35. PLAN VIEW #46. PLAN VIEW #57. SIGNAGE PLAN #18. SIGNAGE PLAN #29. SIGNAGE PLAN #310. SIGNAGE PLAN #411. SIGNAGE PLAN #512. SIGNAGE PLAN #613. SIGNAGE PLAN #714. TYPICAL ROAD X-SEC15. PULLOUT ROAD X-SEC16. BIKE CANOPY DETAIL17. STRUCTURAL #118. STRUCTURAL #219. STRUCTURAL #320. STRUCTURAL #421. DRAINAGE PLAN22. STD DETAIL #123. STD DETAIL #2DRAWINGS SHEETSPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONGENERAL NOTES1. READ ALL STRUCTURAL/CIVIL DRAWINGS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING REFERENCEDELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, VENDOR DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS.2. THE CONTRACTOR FOR ANY PORTION OF WORK SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND SHALL BE THOROGHLY FAMILIAR WITH ALLTHE PHYSICAL FEATURES THAT MAY AFFECT THE WORK IN ANY WAY3. FIELD MEASURE AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO SUIT EXISTING CONDTIONS4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP THE SITE CLEAN AND FREE OF ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS DURING THE PROCESS OFCONSTRUCTION AND LEAVE THE SITE CLEAN UPON COMPLETION OF WORK OR PORTIONS OF THE WORK.5. CONSULTANT MUST APPROVE ALL DEVIATIONS FROM THE WORKING DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR MUST KEEP ANACCURATE RECORD OF ALL CHANGES FROM THE ORIGINAL INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS.6. IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST BETWEEN DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR REVIEW ANDAPPROVAL PRIOR TO PROCEEDING.7. CONTACT BC 1 CALL (604-257-1900) TO OBTAIN UTILITY LOCATION INFORMATION 1-2 WEEKS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.8. CONSTRUCTION TO BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THE MOSTRECENT VERSION OF THE CITY OF VANCOUVER'S ENGINEERING DESIGN MANUAL, COV STANDARD DETAIL DRAWINGS,COV ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE MASTER MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT (MMCD)UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9. MAINTAIN ON-SITE COPIES OF THE MOST CURRENT SET OF DESIGN DRAWINGS AT ALL TIMES MARK UP IN RED ANY FIELDREVISIONS OR APPROVED DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGN. COPIES OF THE MARKED UP DRAWINGS TO BE SUBMITTED TOTHE ENGINEER PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION.10. OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND LICENSES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND ENSURE THAT ALL APPROVALS REQUIRED FOR THEWORK HAVE BEEN OBTAINED.11. USE EXTREME CARE WHEN WORKING NEAR EXISTING SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE. ALL SERVICES ANDINFRASTRUCTURE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED THE ORIGINAL OR BETTER CONDITION ANDTO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER OF THE SERVICE, ENGINEER OF RECORD, AND THE CITY ENGINEER.12. 18. EXISTING ROADWAY NOT INCLUDED IN THESE PROPOSED WORKS SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AND CLEAR FOR THEDURATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND LEFT IN SAME CONDITION AS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SURROUNDING STREETSSHALL BE SWEPT DAILY IF NECESSARY.13. PEDESTRIANS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC SHALL BE PROTECTED AT ALL TIMES. ANY STREET OR SIDEWALK CLOSURESHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY AT LEAST FIVE WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK14. THE ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE TO DIRECT THE CONTRACTOR IF REQUIRED, FOR THE DAY TO DAY OPERATION OF THEPROJECT.15. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD MUST NOTIFY THE ENGINEERING, PARKS AND ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT NOT LESS THANFIVE WORKING DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING WORK ON MUNICIPAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY. A MINIMUM OF TWO WORKING DAYSNOTIFICATION IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY CITY INSPECTION.16. TRAFFIC CONTROL IS TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAYS‘TRAFFIC CONTROL MANUAL OR WORK ON ROADWAYS.17. 20. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD SHALL PROVIDE CERTIFIED RECORD DRAWINGS.ROADWORKS1. ALL MANHOLE COVERS, VALVE COVERS, CATCH BASIN RIMS, AND LIDS OF ANY OTHER STRUCTURE OR UTILITY ARETO BE ADJUSTED TO SUIT FINAL GRADES.2. ALL LOOSE AND ORGANIC MATERIALS ARE TO BE EXCAVATED AND REMOVED FROM ROADWAY AS APPROVED BYTHE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACING OF ANY ROAD GRAVELS.3. ALL SUBGRADES TO BE COMPACTED TO 95% MODIFIED PROCTOR DENSITY.4. CHANGES IN GRADE TO BE FORMED WITH SMOOTH CURVES.5. TESTING OF ROAD MATERIALS AND COMPACTION TO BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SDD .6. SCORING PATTERNS FOR CURB RAMPS SHALL CONFORM TO CITY STANDARD DRAWINGS C8.1 OR C8.2 ANDINDICATE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL IN TO CROSSWALK.7. INSTALL ALL SIGNAGE, PARKING METER, AND BUS ID SLEEVES AS PER CITY STANDARD DRAWING C19.1, C19.2 ANDC19.3.8. BOULEVARDS ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE MASTER MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENTS (MMCD) AND CITY OF VANCOUVER SUPPLEMENTARY SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAIL DRAWINGS UNLESSOTHERWISE SHOWN ON CONTRACT DRAWINGS. BOULEVARDS TO BE SLOPED TO ICs WHERE APPLICABLE.9. ALL CURBS ARE TO BE TYPE A AS PER CoV STD DETAIL DRAWING C4.1ENVIRONMENTAL NOTES1. ALL WORKS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF VANCOUVER, BC MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FEDERALFISHERIES REQUIREMENTS.2. IMMEDIATELY STOP WORK AND NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY SUSPECTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIALSUNCOVERED DURING EXCAVATION.3. PROVIDE DITCHING, SILT FENCING, CATCHBASIN SEDIMENT TRAPS, AND CONTAINMENT FACILITIES ARE REQUIREDTO PREVENT DISCHARGE OR SEDIMENT FROM WORK AREA.4. ALL TEMPORARY FILL SLOPES AND STOCK PILES TO BE PROTECTED FROM WEATHER EROSION.5. ALL EXPOSED SLOPES TO BE PROTECTED FROM WEATHER EROSION AND SEEDED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE. DRAINAGE NOTES1. ALL CATCH BASINS TO BE RELOCATED AS SHOWN IN DRAWINGS, DAMAGED CATCH BASINS TO BE RECYCLED, ANDNEW CATCH BASINS TO BE ORDERED FROM THE THE CITY OF VANCOUVER 4 WEEKS AHEAD OF TIME.2. LEADS TO BE EXTENDED TO FINAL GRADE, MAINTAINGING 2% GRADE AS PER CoV STD DETAIL DRAWINGS S11.1.3. ALL DRAINAGE DESIGN CALCULATIONS HAVE BEE COMPLETED USING THE RATIONAL METHOD AS PER CoV  ANDMMCD STANDARDS.DRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 1 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONSTADIUM RDRRFBRRFBBIKEMATCHLINE AMATCHLINE A2.0m SIDEWALK (TYP.)2.0m LANDSCAPED MEDIAN (TYP.)5.0m MULTI-USE PATH2.5m SPLIT FOR BIKES ANDPEDESTRIANSSTADIUM NEIGHBORHOODWALKWAY TO BEDESIGNED BY OTHERS4.0m x 16.0m  BIKEPARKNG, SEE SHEET 162.5m PARKING LANE (TYP.)3.5m 2-WAY DRIVING LANES (TYP.)RRFB'S @ CROSSINGS WITH LETDOWNS & RAISED SCORES CoVSTD DETAIL C8.44.5m LANDSCPAPEDMEDIAN (TYP.)CATCH BASINS TO BE RELOCATED(TYP.)AS PER CoV STD DETAILDRAWING S11.3 1.75m BENCH AS PERUNC GUIDELINESPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITMULTI-USE PATHLIGHT POLES @35.0mPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITROCK GARDENSPROMOTEGROUNDWATERINFILTRATIONMULTI-USE PATH LIGHTING,POLES SPACED 35.0m (TYP.)LIGHTING POLES SPACED @EX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX. GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6m COVEREX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVERSTOPSTOPEX. ELECTRICAL @ 0.6m COVERDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTCIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 2 OF 23 SCALE: 1:500ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONSTADIUM RDBIKEMATCHLINE AMATCHLINE AMATCHLINE BMATCHLINE BPICK-UP DROP-OFF AREA18 SPACES, 2.7m WIDE1.5m LANDSCAPED MEDIANAS PER STD DETAIL C15.14.0m x 16.0m  BIKE PARKNGPICK-UP DROP-OFF4 SPACES FOR SB TRAFFICCOMMERCIAL SIDEWALK CROSSING ASPER CoV STD DETAIL C7.2 (TYP.)CONC. CURB TYPE 'A' (TYP)AS PER CoV STD DETAIL C4.1CATCH BASINS TO BE RELOCATED(TYP.)AS PER CoV STD DETAILDRAWING S11.3CATCH BASINS TO BE RELOCATED(TYP.)AS PER CoV STD DETAILDRAWING S11.31.75m BENCH AS PER UNC GUIDELINESPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITMULTI-USE PATH LIGHTING,POLES SPACED 35.0m (TYP.)LIGHTING POLES SPACED @17.5m IN DROP-OFF AREAEX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVEREX. GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6m COVEREX. ELECTRICAL @ 0.6m COVEREX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVERLOCATION OF EX. UTILITIES ARE APPROX.DIAL BC 1 CALL FOR EXACT LOCATIONS PRIORTO COMMENCING WORKSTOPEX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVER EX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVEREX. GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6m COVERDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE: 1:500PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 3 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONBUSBUSRRFBRRFBEAGLES DR.MATCHLINE BMATCHLINE BMATCHLINE CMATCHLINE C20.0m BUS STOP CoV STD DETAIL 16.1LOCATION UNCHANGED20.0m BUS STOP CoV STDDETAIL C16.1LOCATION UNCHANGEDSPORTS UTILITY BUILDING ACCESSBIKE LANE CROSSINGAS PER CoV STD DETAIL C7.3RRFB'S @ CROSSINGCATCH BASINS TO BE RELOCATED(TYP.)AS PER CoV STD DETAILDRAWING S11.3CONC. CURB TYPE 'A' (TYP)AS PER CoV STD DETAIL C4.1RAMP PER CoVSTD DETAIL C8.42.0m LANDSCPAPEDMEDIAN (TYP.)1.75m BENCH AS PER UNC GUIDELINESPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITEX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVEREX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVEREX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX. ELECTRICAL @ 0.6m COVEREX. GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6m COVERSIDEWALK RAMP AS PERCoV STD DETAIL C8.4DRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE: 1:500PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 4 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONLOGAN LN.THUNDERBIRD RD.MATCHLINE CMATCHLINE CMATCHLINE DMATCHLINE DTENNIS CENTER ACCESS BIKECROSSING AS PER STD DETAIL C7.3ROUNDABOUT DETAILS:23.5m OUTER DIAMETER5.5m INNER2.0m APRONSINGLE LANESTD DETAIL R5.14.5m LANDSCPAPEDMEDIAN (TYP.)CONC. CURB TYPE 'A' (TYP)AS PER CoV STD DETAIL C4.12.0m LANDSCPAPEDMEDIAN (TYP.)CATCH BASINS TO BE RELOCATED(TYP.)AS PER CoV STD DETAILDRAWING S11.3PEDESTRIAN REFUGEMIN 4.0m LENGTHMIN 1.8 WIDTH1.75m BENCH AS PER UNC GUIDELINESPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITEX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX. ELECTRICAL @ 0.6m COVEREX. GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6m COVEREX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVER LANDSCAPED MEDIAN ASPER STD DETAIL C15.1 (TYP.)DRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE:1:500PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 5 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONMATCHLINE DMATCHLINE DEX. SIDEWALKTIE INTO EX. SIDEWALKEND OF MULTI-USE PATHEX. CROSSWALKSPROP. 50mm ELECTRICAL CONDUITSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPAGRONOMY RDEX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX. ELECTRICAL @ 0.6m COVEREX. ELECTRICAL @ 0.6m COVEREX. 300-900 STM 1.5-3.0 COVERAGRONOMY ROAD GREENSPACEIMPROVEMENTS, INCREASE  SIGHTLINESAND MULTIMODAL LOSCONC. CURB TYPE 'A' (TYP)AS PER CoV STD DETAIL C4.1EX. SIDEWALKEX. SIDEWALKCURB RAMP AS PER STD DETAIL C8.4EX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX GAS 50-100mm @ 0.6 COVEREX. 200-250 WATER  0.9m COVERDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE: 1:500PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 6 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONSTADIUM RDRRFBRRFBSTOPSTOPBIKESignage to be designed aspart of the future stadiumdevelopment15 MINSMAXDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDOR SIGNAGE CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 7 OF 23 SCALE: 1:425ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021& PAVEMENT MARKINGS BIKEMATCHLINE AMATCHLINE A15 MINSMAX15 MINSMAX15 MINSMAXDO NOTBLOCKDO NOTBLOCKDO NOTBLOCKDO NOTBLOCK15 MINSMAX15 MINSMAX15 MINSMAXDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDOR SIGNAGE CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 8 of 23 SCALE: 1:425ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021& PAVEMENT MARKINGS RRFBRRFBEAGLES DR.MATCHLINMATCHLINE BBUSSTOPBUSSTOPDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDOR SIGNAGE CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 9 of 23 SCALE: 1:425ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021& PAVEMENT MARKINGS LOGAN LN.THUNDMATCHLINE CMATCHLINEDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDOR SIGNAGE CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 10 of 23 SCALE: 1:425ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021& PAVEMENT MARKINGS MATCHLINE DMATCHLINDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDOR SIGNAGE CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 11 of 23 SCALE: 1:425ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021& PAVEMENT MARKINGS DRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDORCIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 12 of 23 SCALE: N/AISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021CUSTOM SIGNAGEPay by Plate Template MUP Shared Pathway Pick-off/Drop-off Only Pick-up/Drop-off Only Hawthorn Place Resident Decal OnlyPick-Up/Drop-off Lane Multi-use Path Navigation Signage New Multi-Use PathDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELA & STEVE MARTINEAST MALL CORRIDORCIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 13 of 23 SCALE: N/AISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021ROAD SIGNAGEMulti-Use Path Pavement Marking NEW TabStop SignRRFB Pedestrian CrossingAlignment  - Stay RightNo Stop - Bus OnlyYield to Traffic in RoundaboutPick-up Lane No Stopping/BlockingDO NOTBLOCK15 MINSMAXPick-up Lane Pavement MarkingsDo Not EnterPick-up Lane No Stopping/Blocking30km/h in Roundabout4-Way Tab3.50 2.50 4.50 2.502.502.002.0050mm MIN - SUPERPAVE SURFACE MIX90mm MIN - SUPERPAVE BASE MIX150mm MIN - 19mm MINUS CRUSHED GRANULAR BASE300mm MIN - 75MM MINUS CRUSHED GRANNULAR SUBBASETYP. ROAD X-SECTION2.5% SLOPESIDEWALKGREENSPACEDRIVING LANEON STREETPARKINGGREENSPACE2-WAY MULTIUSE PATH50mm LIGHTING CONDUIT@ 0.60m DEEP3.502.50CONC. CURB TYPE 'A' AS PERCOV STD DETAIL DRAWING C4.1DRIVING LANEON STREETPARKING50mm MMCD UPPER COURSE #2/9.5MM150mm GRANULAR BAEDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE: 1:75PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 14 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION3.502.502.002.00PULL OUT LANE  X-SECTION2.502.513.60 5.800.601.502.5% SLOPESIDEWALKGREENSPACEDRIVING LANESON STREETDROP-OFFGREENSPACEPULL-OUT LANEPICK-UP/DROP-OFFPARKING2-WAY MULTIUSE PATH3.5050mm LIGHTING DUCT50mm MIN - SUPERPAVE SURFACE MIX90mm MIN - SUPERPAVE BASE MIX150mm MIN - 19mm MINUS CRUSHED GRANULAR BASE300mm MIN - 75MM MINUS CRUSHED GRANNULAR SUBBASECONC. CURB TYPE 'A' AS PERCOV STD DETAIL DRAWING C4.1GREENSPACEDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE: 1:100PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 14 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONABCD1HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8HSS178x178x6.42000APLAN VIEW (EL.VARIES)BHSS152x152x13.0250012000HSS178x178x6.4BSECTION112DATUMEL.00.00NOTE:- ALL DIMENSIONS INMILLIMETERS- DATUM IS AT THE TOPOF THE CONCRETEPEDESTAL4000 4000 4000EHSS114x114x4.84000ABCDEHSS114x114x4.8HSS152x152x13.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS152x152x13.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS152x152x13.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS152x152x13.0HSS152x152x13.02500FOUNDATION DESIGNSEE DWGUBC2021-CIVL446-G11-0002(20 PLACES TYP.)SHEARCONNECTIONTBD (TYP.)4000ASECTIONDATUMEL.00.00CONCRETE SLAB 25 MPA4000250DRAFTED BY: ROSSI GUCIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT GROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/2020CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SHEET: 16 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 04/16/2021BICYCLE PARKING PLAN VIEWAND ELEVATION DETAILSPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONABCD E FG H J K21HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8 HSS114x114x4.8HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4HSS178x178x6.4ABCDE FG H J KHSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.04000 40004000 4000 4000 4000 4000 4000 400050005000HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS102x102x8.02500 2500FOUNDATION DESIGNSEE DWGUBC2021-CIVL446-G11-0002(20 PLACES TYP.)SHEARCONNECTIONTBD (TYP.)AB4000PLAN VIEW (EL.VARIES)ASECTIONABCD E FG H J KHSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0FOUNDATION DESIGN  SEE DWGUBC2021-CIVL446-G11-0002(20 PLACES TYP.)SHEARCONNECTIONTBD (TYP.)BSECTION40002917HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS114x114x4.8HSS102x102x8.0HSS102x102x8.0C2917HSS102x102x8.02500HSS102x102x8.0125000HSS178x178x6.4FOUNDATION DESIGNSEE DWGUBC2021-CIVL446-G11-0002(20 PLACES TYP.)SHEARCONNECTIONTBD (TYP.)CSECTION112DATUMEL.00.00DATUMEL.00.00DATUMEL.00.00NOTE:- ALL DIMENSIONS INMILLIMETERS- DATUM IS AT THE TOPOF THE CONCRETEPEDESTALEAST MALL CANOPY PLANAND ELEVATION VIEWSDWG. No: UBC2020-CIVL445-G11-S0001DRAFTED BY: ROSSI GUGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 17 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION160160200 200200200120 12012012070707070ANCHORAGEPLAN VIEW3/4" ANCHOR BOLTS22mm BASE PLATEANCHORAGEELEVATION VIEW30040050022mm THK.BASE PLATEREINFORCEMENTPLAN VIEWREINFORCEMENTELEVATION VIEW4004007010M TIES @ 3004-25MVERT. BAR    HSS1024-3/4" ANCHOR BOLTS1801803-10M TIES @ 18025M VERT.AB88EAST MALL CANOPY FOUNDATION -PLAN AND ELEVATION VIEWSDWG. No: UBC2021-CIVL446-G11-S0002DRAFTED BY: ROSSI GUGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 18 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONE2 1/2". A325M BOLTS(TYP.)HSS 102X102HSS 114X114HSS 114X114HSS 114X114HSS 114X1142X2 1/2" DIA. A325M BOTLS(TYP.)2 1/2" A325M BOLTS(TYP.)HSS 102X102DDSECTIONHSS 102X102HSS 178X178ESECTION2X2 1/2" DIA. A325M BOLTS(TYP.)SHEAR CONNECTION PLAN VIEW10 THK. GUSSET PLATETYP.6610 THK. GUSSET PLATEL89X89X9.510 THK.SHOP WELDED PLATE68686889112EAST MALL CANOPY SHEARCONNECTION - PLAN & SECTIONSDWG. No: UBC2021-CIVL446-G11-S0003DRAFTED BY: ROSSI GUGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 19 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONG2 1/2". A325M BOLTS(TYP.)HSS 102X102HSS 114X114HSS 114X1142X2 1/2" DIA. A325M BOTLS(TYP.)2 1/2" A325M BOLTS(TYP.)HSS 102X102FFSECTIONHSS 102X102HSS 178X178GSECTION2X2 1/2" DIA. A325M BOLTS(TYP.)SHEAR CONNECTION PLAN VIEW10 THK. GUSSET PLATETYP.6610 THK. GUSSET PLATEL89X89X9.510 THK.SHOP WELDED PLATE686889112EAST MALL CANOPY SHEARCONNECTION - PLAN & SECTIONSDWG. No: UBC2021-CIVL446-G11-S0004DRAFTED BY: ROSSI GUGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 20 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.A1A2 A3A4A5A6 A7A8A9A10A11PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 21 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.SCALE: 1:100PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 22 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONDRAFTED BY: KRISTIAN BIELAEAST MALL CORRIDOR LAYOUTGROUP 11NO. SUBMISSION DATE123CLIENT: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA S.E.E.D.S.PRELIMINARY DESIGN 12/6/202004/16/2021CIVIL 446 - CAPSTONE PROJECT SHEET: 23 OF 23ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSIONPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION            Appendix B: Construction Schedule                   Appendix C: Cost Estimate & Benefit Cost Analysis       Table C1: RRFB Cost Breakdown Civil Costs: Cost per Metre Total Metres Total cost Place Conduit with 100 mm backfill, including excavation $ 180.00 20 $ 3,600.00 Material Costs: Cost Quantity Total Cost Hybrid RRFB Unit $ 40,000.00 2 $ 80,000.00 50mm PVC DB2  $ 1.91 24 $ 45.84 50mm PVC DB2 Coupling $ 0.34 12 $ 4.08 50mm PVC DB2 90° Bend $ 9.29 4 $ 37.16 50mm PVC DB2 45֯ Bend $ 12.28 4 $ 49.12  Total Cost: $ 84,000.00 Table C2: Multi-Modal Cost Breakdown Multi-Modal Path Dimensions: Meterage, m Length 700 Width 5  Cost Breakdown: Cost Removal of Existing Concrete $ 17,845.70 New Concrete $ 169,784.08 Gravel Base $ 55,019.32 Geo-textile base $ 6,369.32 Landscaping $ 72,096.59 Paint Making at Intersections $ 35,227.81 Signalization $ 487,538.61 Signage $ 9,678.12 Total Cost: $ 854,000.00       Table C3: Boulevard Excavation/Fill and Paving Cost Breakdown Labour Day Rates: Daily Rate 1 Equip. Oper. $ 678.80 Labourer (4) $ 2,024.00 1 Backhoe Loader, 48 H.P. $ 235.13 Total Day Rate: $ 2,937.93 Excavation Day Rates: Quantity Excavation Rate (m3/hr) 15 Total Excavation Hours 112 Total Excavation Days 12 Total Excavation/Fill Costs: $ 337,000.00 Paving: Quantity 1 sq.ft  0.092902267 m2 $ 5.00/sq.ft Cost/m2 of paving $ 53.82 Area of Boulevard, m2 (700m x 8m) 5600 Total Paving Cost:  $ 302,000.00  Total Excavation/Fill and Paving Costs: $ 639,000.00  Table C4: Installation of Roundabout Breakdown   Cost per m2 Area Solid Concrete Island $ 369.50 433.7361357  Total Cost: $ 161,000.00    Table C5: Asphalt Road Paving of East Mall Corridor Road Layers and Dimensions:  Travel Lanes Depth, m Width, m Length, m Volume, m3 Asphalt Pavement 0.100 7 770 539 25mm Crush Base Course 0.150 7 770 808.5 25mm Select Granular Sub Base 0.150 7 770 808.5 Road Layers and Dimensions:  Parking Depth, m Width, m Length, m Volume, m3 Asphalt Pavement 0.100 5 833 416.5 25mm Crush Base Course 0.150 5 833 624.75 25mm Select Granular Sub-Base 0.150 5 833 624.75     Cost Breakdown: Cost per m3 Cost per m2 Cost per kg Unit Weight kg/m3 Kilograms, kg Cost Asphalt Pavement - - $ 0.40 2243 2143186.5 $ 865,416.57 Subgrade Surface (Second Layer) - $ 1.42 - - - $ 13,568.10 Granular Fill $ 100.00 - - - - $ 143,325.00  Total Cost: $ 1,023,000.00 Table C6: Pedestrian Canopy Cost Estimate  Section Linear Mass (kg/m) Length (m) Quantity Total Length (m) Total Mass (kg) Column HSS102X102X8.0 22.1 2.71 38 102.98 2275.858 Trans. Beam HSS114X114X4.8 16 5 19 95 1520 Long. Beam HSS178X178X6.4 33.4 4 34 136 4542.4  Total: 8338.258 Cost of Steel:      Per kg $ 1.33    Install of Steel:     Per kg $ 0.87          Minor Materials:      Material Part Quantity Total Volume (m3) Cost Concrete Concrete Pedestal 38 3.04  $ 668.80  Steel 3/4" anchor bolts 152 -  $ 1,683.70  22 THK Base Plate 38 0.07524  $ 5,173.47  L89x89x9.5 68 0.0172448  $ 282.74  1/2" A325M bolts 576 -  $ 263.50  10 THK Base Plate 76 0.00798  $ 5,568.24  10 THK Gusset Plate 38 0.00399  $ 851.31  Total: $ 14,491.76 Total Cost: $ 33,000.00        Table C7: Bicycle Canopy Cost Estimate  Section Linear Mass (kg/m) Length (m) Quantity Total Length (m) Total Mass (kg) Column HSS102X102X8.0 52.4 2.71 5 13.55 710.02 Trans. Beam HSS114X114X4.8 16 4 4 16 256 Long. Beam HSS178X178X6.4 33.4 2.01 5 10.05 335.67  Total: $ 1301.69 Cost of Steel:      Per kg $ 1.33    Install of Steel:     Per kg $ 0.87          Minor Materials:      Material Part Quantity Total Volume (m3) Cost Concrete Concrete Pedestal 5 0.4  $ 88.00  Steel 3/4" anchor bolts 64 -  $ 708.93  22 THK Base Plate 5 0.0099  $ 680.72  L89x89x9.5 17 0.0043112  $ 282.74  1/2" A325M bolts 3108 -  $ 263.50  10 THK Base Plate 10 0.00105  $ 732.66  10 THK Gusset Plate 5 0.000525  $ 112.01  Total: $ 2,868.57 Total Cost: $ 6,000.00 Table C8: Drainage Network Cost Breakdown Civil Costs: Cost per metre Total meterage, m Total Cost Place conduit with 1000mm backfill, including excavation $ 180.00 900 $ 162,000.00  Material Costs:  Quantity Cost Total Catch Basins 45 $ 2,000.00 $ 112,000.00 200mm PVC SDR35 900 $ 153.00 $ 1,377.00  Total Cost: $ 276,000.00        Table C9: Arborist Costs Labour Costs: Cost Quantity Total Cost Removal of 1 Tree $ 400.00 100 $ 40,000.00  Permit Costs:  Quantity Cost Total First Tree Costs $ 75.00 1 $ 75.00 Additional Tree Costs $ 250.00 99 $ 24,750.00  Total Cost: $ 64,825.00 Table C10: Traffic Accommodation Labour Costs: Cost/day Number of Days Total Cost Flaggers, set-up, mob/demob $ 1,250.00 69 $ 87,000.00 Table C11: Maintenance Plan Maintenance Costs: Total Estimate Cost Percentage of Total Cost Total Cost  $ 3,228,00.00 10% $ 322,800.00  Table C12: Final Cost Breakdown Final Estimates: Costs RRFB Units and Civil Work $ 84,000.00 Multi-Modal Path $ 854,000.00 Boulevard Excavation/Fill and Paving $ 639,000.00 Installation of Roundabout $ 161,000.00 Asphalt Road Paving of East Mall Corridor $ 1,023,000.00 Pedestrian Canopy $ 33,000.00 Bicycle Canopy $ 6,000.00 Drainage Network $ 276,000.00 Arborist $ 65,000.00 Traffic Accommodation $ 87,000.00 Maintenance Plan $ 323,000.00 10% Contingency $ 355,100.00 Total Cost: $ 3,906,100.00         SHORTBEN.XLS Required Inputs in YellowVersion: short_benefit_cost.xlsx Optional Inputs in GreenMake a workng copyand keep this as the original.Existing Proposed NotesGeneral InformationSegment Length (km) 0.80 0.80 Important to show any differences between base & prop.Base Year 2020 2020 Should be same for base and proposed.Base Year AADT 10,000 10,000 Base & Proposed AADT should normally be the same.Compound Annual Traffic Growth (%) 1.6% 1.6% Compound growth% Trucks 20% 20%1st Year Benefits Begin 2022 2022 Typically the year after construction is completeBenefit Period (yrs) 25 25Analysis Period (yrs) 27 27 Construction Period + Benefit PeriodHorizon Year 2046 2046Discount Rate 6% 6%Financial AccountYear Capital Costs ($) Existing Proposed2019 Property $0 $02019 Eng, PM, Site Supv, Plant Insp. $0 $400,000 Typically 15% to 25% of total construction cost2020 Grading & Drainage $0 $1,200,0002021 Base & Sub-base $0 $400,0002021 Structures $0 $20,0002021 Surface $0 $2,000,0002030 Other $0 $0 Rehabilitate an existing bridge for exampleTotal ($) $0 $4,020,000Present Value ($) $0 $3,907,019 Sum of one time costs discounted back to the base year.Service Life (yrs) Typical Values:Property 100 100 Property 100 yrsEng, PM, Site Supv, Plant Insp. 0 0 Engineering, Planning & PM 0 yrsGrading & Drainage 60 60 Grading & Drainage 60 yrsBase & Sub-base 50 50 Base & Sub-base 50 yrsStructures 80 80 Structures 80 yrsSurface 40 40 Surface 40 yrsOther 25 0 or can be a composite of several categoriesResidual Value in Horizon Year ($)Property $0 $0 Residual values account for the value of the asset beyond the  Eng, PM, Site Supv, Plant Insp. $0 $0 end of the planning horizon year. Grading & Drainage $0 $1,066,847Base & Sub-base $0 $324,412Structures $0 $19,372Surface $0 $1,290,982Other $0 $0Horizon Yr Value Total ($) $0 $2,701,613Present Value ($) $0 $593,842Annual MaintenanceLane-kilometers 0.8 0.8Road Maintenance ($/Ln-km/yr) $5,099 $5,099Other Mtce ($/yr) $0 $0PV of Maintenance ($) $49,194 $49,194Periodic ResurfacingResurfacing Year 2022 2035 Ignored if >= horizon yearCost ($/Ln-km) $70,300 $70,300 Mill and Fill overlayResurfacing Life (yrs) 15 15 Typical Pavement life is 15 yrs from the last resurfacingNext Resurfacing Year 2037 2050 Ignored if >= horizon yearPV of Resurfacing ($) $70,939 $23,467 Present Value of resurfacingsPV of Residual ($) $4,945 $3,297 Residual value in the horizon yr assuming straight line depreciationConstruction Delay Existing ProposedYear in which delay occurs 2022 2021Number of Days 50 150 How many days the restriction is in placeHours/day when delay occurs 4 8 and the number of hours per dayVeh/hr during delay hours 1000 500 What is the flow rate (veh/hr) during times when the restriction is in placeDelay (sec/veh) 20 10 How many seconds on average, is a vehicle delayedTotal Veh-Hrs of Delay 1,111 1,667    PV of Time Cost ($) $23,734 $37,736 General purpose traffic occupants + truck driversPV of Vehicle Operating Cost ($) $4,165 $6,623 Auto and Truck fuel + Truck time costPV Time + VOC ($mill) $0.03 $0.04Net Savings ($mill) -$0.016ReliabilityClosure Duration (Hrs/collision) Existing Proposed Delay due to collisions.Fatal 6.0 6.0 May not be applicable in urban areasInjury 2.0 2.0 where bypass routes are available.PDO 0.5 0.5Collision Weighted Average (hr/coll) 1.36 1.20Closure hrs. in Implementation Yr 1.59 1.09Traffic Arrival Rate (veh/hr) 800 800 8% of AADT is reasonable for rural locations.  Consider 4% or 5% in urban areas.Cost/veh-hr $30.94 $30.94Annual Cost $39,469 $26,959Present Value ($mill) $0.476 $0.325Net Savings ($mill) $0.151Customer Service AccountTime Costs Existing ProposedValue of Travel Time ($/hr)Passenger Veh Occupancy 1.2 1.2 Use the same for base and proposed.Value of Time ($/occupant) $18.49 $18.49Car ($/veh) $22.19 $22.19Truck Driver Payroll Cost($/veh) $31.25 $31.25 includes drivers wages + payroll expenses & benefitsTravel Time in 1st yr benefits begin% of AADT % of AADT occurring in each period.  For examplePeak 30.0% 30.0% a 3 hr peak period with 10% of AADT per hr = 30% of AADTShoulder 35.0% 35.0% These splits are used to differentiate speed, delay andLow 35.0% 35.0% veh. Op. costs during different periods of the day. Total 100.0% 100.0% Total must equal 100%Auto Speed (km/hr)Peak 40 40 Representative average speeds in peak and shoulderShoulder 60 50 periods are usually not much lower than  speeds inLow 70 50 the low period  unless demand is exceeding 80% of capacity.Truck Speed (km/hr)Peak 40 40Shoulder 60 50Low 70 50Avg. Control Delay (sec/veh) LOS for Signalized I/S (sec/veh)Peak 35 20 LOS A B C D EShoulder 35 10 Max Delay 10 20 35 55 80Low 20 5% of Vehicles Stopping % Vehicles Stopping during each period should be 0 Peak 0% 0% if control delay is 0. Values are used for fuel calculations onlyShoulder 0% 0%  and do not impact delay calculations.Low 0% 0%Travel Time (veh-hrs/yr) does not include cross street delayCar 69,117 61,263Truck 17,279 15,316Value ($/yr)Car $1,533,568 $1,359,311Truck $539,977 $478,620Both $2,073,544 $1,837,931Travel Time in Horizon Year Existing Proposed Horizon year inputs account for changes in operating speeds or delayAADT Horizon Yr 15,351 15,351 over the planning period.% of AADTPeak 30.0% 30.0%Shoulder 35.0% 35.0%Low 35.0% 35.0%Total 100.0% 100.0%Auto Speed (km/hr)Peak 40 40Shoulder 60 50Low 70 50Truck Speed (km/hr)Peak 40 40Shoulder 60 50    Low 70 50Avg. Control Delay (sec/veh)Peak 35 20Shoulder 35 10Low 20 5% of Vehicles StoppingPeak 0% 0%Shoulder 0% 0%Low 0% 0%Travel Time (veh-hrs/yr)Car 102,784 91,105Truck 25,696 22,776Horizon Year Value ($/yr)Car $2,280,582 $2,021,444Truck $803,004 $711,760EquivalentGrowth Rate in Time Costs (%/yr)Car 1.48% 1.48%Truck 1.48% 1.48%Present Value of Time Costs ($mill)for Benefit PeriodCar $21.111 $18.712Truck $7.433 $6.589Total $28.544 $25.301Typical acc. rates and severities by service class (2009 - 2013 data)Accident Costs Existing Proposed Service Class UAU2 UAU4 UAD4 UED4 UFD4 RAU2Rate (coll/mvk) 0.78 0.60 Rate (coll/mvk) 0.60 0.76 0.78 0.42 0.29 0.39Severity All Collisions% Fatal 0.0% 1.30% Fatal 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0%% Injury 57.1% 42.2% Injury 42.2% 25.6% 57.1% 37.0% 0.0% 43.9%% PDO 42.9% 56.5% PDO 56.5% 74.4% 42.9% 63.0% 0.0% 53.0%Cost/CollisionFatal $8,087,204 $8,087,204  based on 1.05 fatalities and 0.78 injuries/fat coll.Injury $302,636 $302,636 based on 0.15 major + 1.2 minor injuries/inj collPDO $13,518 $13,518Weighted Average $178,605 $240,484Present Value Coll. Costs ($ mill) $5.845 $6.054Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC) Existing ProposedRunning Fuel (L/km) Fuel consumed at running speed, no control delayCar 0.091 0.094Composite Truck 0.366 0.356 35%SU, semi - 20%empty 30% full, Btrain- 7%empty 8%fullIdle Fuel (L/hr)Car 1.00 1.00Composite Truck 2.50 2.50Control Delay Fuel (L/veh) Additional fuel consumed due to control delay.Car 0.008 0.003 includes deceleration, stop time and accelerationComposite Truck 0.021 0.008Fuel (Litres/yr) Annual Fuel Consumption (L)Cars 237,433 227,707Composite Truck 228,779 213,893Fuel Price ($/L) Price net of taxes is about 75% of pump priceCar $1.014 $1.014Composite Truck $0.942 $0.942Fuel Cost ($/yr)Car $240,757 $230,895 Includes excess fuel consumption due to control delay, if any.Composite Truck $215,510 $201,487Other Vehicle CostsCar ($/km) $0.135 $0.135 Use-related costs (other than fuel and driver)Truck Time ($/hr) $14.65 $14.65 Combination TruckTruck Distance ($/km) $0.257 $0.257 Excludes fuel and driverAnnual Cost ($/yr) Composite values based on peak, shoulder and Car $556,818 $546,955Truck Time $237,171 $215,454Truck Distance $365,598 $351,575Present Value of VOC ($millions)Car $7.751 $7.614Truck Time $3.265 $2.966     Truck Distance $5.089 $4.894Total $16.106 $15.474Summary of Discounted Costs ($millions) Existing ProposedCapital $0.000 $3.907Maintenance & Resurf $0.120 $0.073Residual Value ($0.005) ($0.597) Negative because it it a recoverableTotal $0.115 $3.383 Sum of discounted CostsSummary of Discounted BenefitsTime Savings $3.243 Savings due to higher speeds or shorter distanceAccident Savings ($0.209) Savings due to reduced accident rate or severityVehicle Operating Savings $0.631 Often negative with increasing fuel at higher speedConstruction Delay ($0.016) Construction delay is treated as a negative benefit.Reliability $0.151Total Benefits $3.800Summary of Results (Present Values in $millions)Financial Account $0.115 $3.383Incremental Cost $3.267 = Proposed - BaseCustomer Service Account $51.00 $47.20Incremental Benefit $3.800 =Base -ProposedB/C Ratio 1.16 = Incremental benefits/incremental costsNet Present Value $0.533 = Incremental Benefits - Incremental CostsGreenhouse Gas Reduction Kg/Litre Gas Dies CO2 is 2016 stdCarbon Dioxide 61 2.25 2.62Nitrogen Oxide 4 0.262 0.08Hydrocarbons 3 0.122 0.12Annual Saving (tonnes/yr) 68 2.634 2.824              Appendix D: Synchro Report Sample      A sample Synchro Report is shown below (Thunderbird Boulevard Intersection, 2040 PM Volumes, Future Roundabout Configuration). The full list of synchro reports (2020/2040 AM/PM Existing/Future) can be made available upon request to Steve of Team 11.                Appendix E: Calculations       Sightline Sample Calculation V = 85th percentile speeds  G = 2% grade f = 0.41 (wet pavement conditions)    Current sightlines and required SSD were measured from Google Maps as shown in the adjacent Figure.  A summary of existing vs. required SSD that were used to inform the design and location of parking spaces is shown in the table below. Crossing Location  85th Percentile Speed  Stopping Sight Distance Required (Wet Pavement)  Current Sightline SSD (NB)  Current Sightline SSD (SB)  Eagles Drive  52.8 km/h  63 m  20 m  30 m  Stadium Road  52.8 km/h  63 m  65 m  50 m   Forecasted Traffic Volumes & Sample Synchro Report Compounding Growth Rate (1%) = (1+0.01)21 = 23% increase in vehicle volumes Mode Shift of ~8% aligning with the targets set by UBC = 23% - 8% = 15% increase due to population growth. 1500-unit residential development, via ITE Trip Generation Manual = 400 additional trips to/from Stadium Neighbourhood These trips were then distributed in accordance with the existing traffic flow patterns in the AM and PM.        Rational Method Calculation and IDF Curves         Max flow to a catch basin (design flow):   Total drainage area = 0.9 ha   No. of catch basins = 45  Drainage area per catch basin = 0.0225ha , round up to min spacing 250m2     Runoff coefficitent (C): 0.88  Using the 2100 IDF curve and assuming a min concentration time of 5 minutes (max flow)  Rainfall instensity (I) = 122.8 mm/hr  Design flow (Q)= 0.007m3/s    Pipe Capacity Check:    D = Pipe diameter (200mm)  N = mannings coefficient (0.013)  S = 2%  U (kinematic viscosity) = 1.0E-6  Qfull = 0.017 m3/s  Qfull > Design flow    Catch Basin Capacity Check      H = 1.2m  Qcap = 0.18 m3/s  Qcap > Design flow     CIVL446Team 11Project II: East Mall Redesign Prepared by: Rossi GuPedestrian Canopy - Foundation Design           Input            output The canopy column foundation is a concrete pedestal sitting underground with base plates, anchor bolts and welds connecting the concrete and the steel column.After comparing the reactions in SAP2000 model, the loading difference between the corner columns and the side columns are little. In order to save the effort fordesigning and construction, only side column foundation will be designed in detail and the corner ones are going to use the same design since the side columnfoundation is more critical and governs the design. Design Loads  Pedestal Design SummaryMax Tension = 0kNMax Compression = 58.8kNMax Shear in X dir = 10.3kNMax Shear in Y dir = 10.4kNMax Moment in X dir = 13.0kNmMax Moment in Y dir = 12.9kNmLength = 400mmWidth = 400mm4-25M Vertical Reinforcement10M Tie @ 300Utilization: 0.13Governing Case: Bending Anchor Design Summary  Base Plate Design Summary4-20M Dia. AnchorEmbedment length = 250mmUtilization:0.76Governing case: Concrete breakout strength300mm x 300mm x 22mm thk.Base Plate Design     Column  Geometry      Material PropertiesD 102mm Depth of the member fc 25MPa Specified concrete compressive strengthB 102mm Width of the flange Fyc 400MPa Column steel yield strengthFyp 400MPa Base plate steel yield strength     Design Factorsϕ 0.9 Steel resistance factorϕc 0.65 Concrete resistance factor     Factored Load Cf 58.8kNCalculate area of base plate requiredAbp_reqCf0.85 ϕc fc Required base plate plan areaAbp_req 4.257 103 mm2 Abp_req 65.246 mmDesigned Base Plate Plan Dimensions:Bp 300mm Cp 300mm A1 Bp Cp 9 104 mm2Checkarea_req if A1 Abp_req "Pass" "Need bigger plan dim."  Checkarea_req "Pass"Determine m and n, calculate required plate thicknessbloaded 0.8 B 81.6 mm Width of the loaded area from columndloaded 0.95 D 96.9 mm Depth of the loaded area from columnnedgeBp bloaded2 109.2 mm medgeCp dloaded2 101.55 mmtp1_req medge2 CfBp Cp ϕ Fyp Plate thickness based on m tp1_req 6.118 mmtp2_req nedge2 CfBp Cp ϕ Fyp Plate thickness based on n tp2_req 6.579 mmtp3_req 20% max medge nedge  Plate thickness based on rule of thumb tp3_req 21.84 mm tp 22mm Designed base plate thicknesstp_req ceilmax tp1_req tp2_req tp3_req mm mm Required plate thickness tp_req 22 mm Checktp if tp tp_req "Pass" "Need thicker plate."  Checktp "Pass"CIVL446Team 11Project II: East Mall Redesign Prepared by: Rossi GuWelded Connection Check Weld Geometry Lleg1 8mm Weld size 1 (leg size) Lleg2 8mm Weld size 2 (leg size)  Weld MaterialXu 490MPa Tensile strength of weld material (E49XX)L1 204mm Length of the weld 1 L2 204mm Length of the weld 2θ1 0 Weld Angle 1 Weld Angle 2θ2π2  Base Material  Design Constants Base Plate Fu_base 450MPa ϕw 0.67t1 22mm Thickness of base plate 1 t2 8mm Thickness of welded plate 2 Factored Loadw1 300mm Width of base plate 1 w2 102mm Width of base plate 2 Tf 140.5kN Factored tension load on the weld connectionCheck for Strength of Weld MetalAw1Lleg12 L1Effective area of the weld throat 1 Aw1 1154 mm2θ1_deg min θ1 θ2  180π θ2_deg max θ1 θ2  180πAw2 Lleg22 L2 Effective area of the weld throat 2 Aw2 1154 mm2Mw0.85θ1_deg6000.85θ2_deg600 Strength reduction factor for multi-orientation welds Mw 0.85Vr1 0.67 ϕw Aw1 Xu 1 0.5 sin θ1 1.5  Mw Strength of weld 1 Vr1 216 kNVr2 0.67 ϕw Aw2 Xu 1 0.5 sin θ2 1.5  Mw Strength of weld 2 Vr2 324 kNVr Vr1 Vr2 Total weld metal strength Vr 539 kNDesRatioVrTfVr DesRatioVr 0.26CheckVr if DesRatioVr 1 "Pass" "Fail"  CheckVr "Pass"Check for Strength of Base MetalNote: if matching electrodes are used, the base metal check is not requiredAm Lleg1 L1 Lleg2 L2 3.264 10 3 m2 Area of the fusion face Am 3264 mm2Vr_base 0.67 ϕw Am Fu_base Vr_base 659 kNTotal strength of base platesDesRatioVrbpTfVr_base DesRatioVrbp 0.213CheckVrbp if DesRatioVrbp 1 "Pass" "Fail"  CheckVrbp "Pass"Check for Weld Size and Length Minimum Leg sizetp_max max t1 t2  22 mm Maximum welded plate thickness Lleg_min 3mm tp_max 6mmif5mm 6mm tp_max 12mmif6mm 12mm tp_max 20mmif8mm otherwise Minimum weld sizeCheckMinLeg if Lleg1 Lleg_min Lleg2 Lleg_min "Pass" "Fail"  Lleg_min 8 mmCheckMinLeg "Pass" Maximum Leg size (recommended only)  Minimum weld lengthtp_min min t1 t2  8 mm Minimum welded plate thickness Lw_min max 38mm 4 Lleg1 4 Lleg2  38 mm Minimum weld lengthLleg_max min 0.75 tp_min tp_min tp_min 6mmiftp_min 2mm otherwise CheckMinWeldL if L1 Lw_min L2 Lw_min "Pass" "Fail" Lleg_max 6 mmCheckMinWeldL "Pass"Resistance of a 4 Cast-in Place Anchor Bolts Group in UnreinforcedConcrete to CSA A23.3-14Reference CSA A23.3-14Concrete Design HandbookCIVL446Team 11Project II: East Mall Redesign Prepared by: Rossi GuInput Data Anchor rod dimensions  Concrete pedestal dimensionsda34 in Anchor rod diameter hped 2000mm Height of pedestalEffective area of anchor bolts(Concrete Design Handbook Table 12.3)Bpx 400mmAse 215mm2Bpy 400mmBearing area of anchor bolts(Concrete Design Handbook Table 12.3)Abrg 422mm2sx 160mmhefr 250mm Anchor embedment depth sy 160mm Factored Loads  Material Parameters  Resistance Design FactorsFzt 41kN Factored axial tension fc 25MPa ϕc 0.65 ϕs 0.85 ϕg 0.80 (CSA A23.3-14 Cl.8.4.2 and D.7.1.3)Fzc 0kN Factored axial compression fya 36ksi 248.211 MPa Rts 0.8 Rtc 1.15 Rtp 1.15 (CSA A23.3-14 Cl. D.5.3)Fx 10.3kN Factored shear in x-dir futa 58ksi 399.896 MPa Rvs 0.75 Rvc 1.15 Rvp 1.15 (CSA A23.3-14 Cl. D.5.3)Fy 10.4kN Factored shear in y-dirVres Fx2 Fy2 14.64 kN Note: the anchor rods are assumed not subject to bending.Detailed CalculationEdge distancescxBpx sx2 Edge distance parallel to x-axis cx 120 mm cyBpy sy2 cy 120 mmEdge distance parallel to y-axiscmin min cx cy  120 mm Checke "Pass" cx 1.5hefr cy 1.5hefrif"Fail" otherwiseChecke "Pass"cmax max cx cy  120 mmCheck required edge distance and spacingsr.min 4da Minimum spacing (CSA A23.3-14 Cl.D.9.2) cr.min 6da Minimum edge distance (CSA A23.3-14 Cl.D.9.2)DesRatiossr.minmin sx sy  0.476 DesRatioccr.mincmin0.952 Checkcs if DesRatios 1 DesRatioc 1 "Pass" "Fail"  Checkcs "Pass"Anchor Rods Tension Resistance Check i) Anchor bolts tensile strengh (Cl. D.6.1.2)Nsar Ase ϕs futa Rts Factored tensile resistance Nsar 58.5 kNDesRatioatFzt4.Nsar DesRatioat 0.18 Checkat if DesRatioat 1 "Pass" "Fail"  Checkat "Pass" ii) Concrete breakout resistance with anchor reinforcement (D.6.2.2)kc 10 For cast in headed anchors as per D.6.2.2Monify the effective anchorage depth for narrow members (Cl.D.6.2.3):hef maxcmax1.5max sx sy 3 cmax 1.5hefr Checke "Pass"=ifhefr otherwise hef 80 mmCIVL446Team 11Project II: East Mall Redesign Prepared by: Rossi Guax min cx 1.5hef  ax 120 mm ay min cy 1.5 hef  ay 120 mmFactored concrete breakout resistance for singleanchor in tension (Cl.D.6.2.2) Nbr kc ϕcfcMPahefmm1.5 RtckN1000 hef 275mmif3.9 ϕcfcMPahefmm53 RtckN1000 otherwise Nbr 26.743 kNProjected area of failure surface for a singel anchorremoved from edges (CSA A23.3-14 Figure D.6):ANco 9 hef 2 ANco 0.06 m2Projected area of failure surface for a single anchor: Projected area of failure surface of anchor group:ANr ANco cmin 1.5hefif2ax 2 ay otherwise ANgr 2ax sx  2.ay sy  ANgr 0.16 m2ANr 0.06 m2ψedN 1.0 cmin 1.5hefif0.7 0.3cmin1.5hef otherwise Factor for edge effect(Cl.D.6.2.5) ψedN 1Factor for resistance in tension to account forcracking. 1.0 being conservative assumingconcrete cracked at service loads (Cl.D.6.2.5)ψcN 1.0 ψcpN 1.0 Factor for concrete break out resistancewhich only applies to post-installedanchors. Use 1.0 for cast-in (Cl.D.6.2.7)ψecN 1.0 Factor for eccentrically loaded anchor groups (Cl. D.6.2.4)Factored concrete breakoutresistance in tension for asingle anchor (Cl.6.2.1)Factored concrete breakoutresistance in tension foranchor group (Cl.6.2.1)NcbrANrANcoψecN ψcN ψcpN Nbr 26.743 kN NcbgrANgrANcoψecN ψcN ψcpN Nbr 74.287 kNNcb 4Ncbr ANgr 4 ANcoifNcbgr otherwise DesRatiobtFztNcb DesRatiobt 0.55 Checkbt if DesRatiobt 1 "Pass" "Fail" Ncb 74.287 kNCheckbt "Pass"Pullout resistance of cast-in anchors (Cl. D.6.3.1)Modification factor for pullout resistance when ft<frat service load levels. Use 1.0 for a conservativedesign (can be up to 1.4, Cl.D.6.3.6)Factored pullout resistance intension fpr a single anchor (cast-in,Cl.D.6.3.4)ψcP 1.0 Npr ψcP 8 Abrg ϕc fc Rtp Npr 63.089 kNNprf 4 Npr Total resistance Nprf 252.356 kN DesRatioctpFztNprf DesRatioctp 0.16Checkctp if DesRatioctp 1 "Pass" "Fail"  Checkctp "Pass"Concrete Side-face blowout resistance in tension (CSA A23.3-14 Cl.D.6.4)Nsbr_1 13.3cmin Abrg ϕcfcMPa MPa Rtc Resistance forsingle headedanchor (Cl. D.6.4.1)Resistance for singleheaded anchor,factored by edgedistance (Cl. D.6.4.1)Nsbr1cmaxcmin4 Nsbr_1 1cmaxcmin 3ifNsbr_1 otherwise Nsbr 61.269 kNNsbr_1 122.538 kNResistance for multipleheaded anchor(Cl..D.6.4.2)Nsbgr 1min sx sy 6cminNsbr_1 Nsbf 4Nsbr  min sx sy  6cminifNsbgr otherwiseNsbf 149.769 kNNsbgr 149.769 kNDesRatiocts 0 2.5cmin hefrifFztNprfotherwise DesRatiocts 0 Checkcts if DesRatiocts 1 "Pass" "Fail" Checkcts "Pass"Anchor rods shear resistance Anchor blot shear strength (Cl.D.7.1.2 b)Shear resistance reduction built-up grout padFor cast-in headed bolts Vsar Ase ϕs 0.6 futa Rvs 32.886 kN Shear resistance for one anchor bolt Vsar.r Vsar ϕg 26.309 kNDesRatioavVres4Vsar.r0.139 Checkav if DesRatioav 1 "Pass" "Fail"  Checkav "Pass" Concrete breakout resistance (Cl.D.7.2)ls min 8da hefr  Load bearing length for anchor in shear (Cl.D.7.2.2) ls 152.4 mmShear resistance modification factor (Cl.D.7.2.7). The anchors areassumed in the cracked concrete with reinforcement of a 15Mbar orgreater between the anchor and the edge and with the reinforcementenclosed within stirrups spaced not more than 100mm apart.ψecV 1.0 Modification factor for eccentrically loaded anchorgroups. Not applicable to this calculation (Cl. D.7.2.5)ψcV 1.4CIVL446Team 11Project II: East Mall Redesign Prepared by: Rossi Gu Check shear in x-dir Projected area for a single anchor (Cl.D.7.2.1)ca1x cx sx ca2x cy AVco_x 4.5cx2 0.065 m2Factored concrete breakout resistance in shear parallel to x axis for a single anchor (Cl.D.7.2.2):Vbr_x1 0.58lsda0.2 damm ϕcfcMPacxmm1.5 RvckN1000 18.852 kN Vbr_x2 3.75 ϕcfcMPacxmm1.5 RvckN1000 18.424 kN Vbr_x min Vbr_x1 Vbr_x2 When anchors are locaed in narrow sections of limited thickness: Modification factors for edge effect (Cl.D.7.2.6)ca1xo ca1x ca2x 1.5ca1x hped 1.5ca1xifmin ca1xca2x1.5hped1.5sy3 otherwise ca1xo 53.333 mm ψedV_x 1.0 ca2x 1.5ca1xoif0.7 0.3ca2x1.5ca1xo otherwiseψedV_x 1Projected area fora a single anchor (Figure D.13) Projected area for a group of anchors (Figure D.13)wc2x min cy 1.5cx  2 240 mm hc2x min hped 1.5cx  180 mm AVc_x wc2x hc2x AVgr_x wc2x sy hc2x 0.072 m2Concrete breakout resistance for a single anchor (Cl.D.7.2.1) Concrete breakout resistance for anchor group (Cl.D.7.2.1)Vcbr_xAVc_xAVco_xψedV_x ψcV Vbr_x Vcbr_x 17.196 kN Vcbgr_xAVgr_xAVco_xψecV ψedV_x ψcV Vbr_x Vcbgr_x 28.66 kN Check shear in y-dir Projected area for a single anchor (Cl.D.7.2.1)ca1y cy sy ca2y cx AVco_y 4.5cy2Factored concrete breakout resistance in shear parallel to y axis for a single anchor (Cl.D.7.2.2):Vbr_y1 0.58lsda0.2 damm ϕcfcMPacymm1.5 RvckN1000 18.852 kN Vbr_y2 3.75 ϕcfcMPacymm1.5 RvckN1000 18.424 kN Vbr_y min Vbr_y1 Vbr_y2 When anchors are locaed in narrow sections of limited thickness: Modification factors for edge effect (Cl.D.7.2.6)ca1yo ca1y ca2y 1.5ca1y hped 1.5ca1yifmin ca1yca2y1.5hped1.5sx3 otherwise ψedV_y 1.0 ca2y 1.5ca1yoif0.7 0.3ca2y1.5ca1yo otherwiseψedV_y 1Projected area fora a single anchor (Figure D.13)wc2y min cx 1.5cy  2 0.24 m hc2y min hped 1.5cy  0.18 m AVc_y wc2y hc2y 0.043 m2Projected area for a group of anchors (Figure D.13)AVgr_y wc2y sx hc2y 0.072 m2Concrete breakout resistance for anchor group (Cl.D.7.2.1)Concrete breakout resistance for a single anchor (Cl.D.7.2.1)Vcbgr_yAVgr_yAVco_yψecV ψedV_y ψcV Vbr_y Vcbgr_y 28.66 kNVcbr_yAVc_yAVco_yψedV_y ψcV Vbr_y Vcbr_y 17.196 kNDesRatiovbx maxFx4Vcbr_xFxVcbgr_x0.359 DesRatiovby maxFy4Vcbr_yFyVcbgr_y0.363DesRatiovb max DesRatiovbx DesRatiovby  DesRatiovb 0.36 Checkvb if DesRatiovb 1 "Pass" "Fail"  Checkvb "Pass"Concrete pryout resistance of anchor in shear (Cl.D.7.3)Factored pryout resistance forsingle anchorkcp if hef 65mm 1.2 2.0  Coefficient for prying resistance kcp 2 Vcpr kcp Ncbr Vcpr 53.487 kNVcpgr kcp Ncb Factored pryout resistance foranchor groupVcpgr 148.574 kN DesRatioprVresVcpgr DesRatiopr 0.1Checkpr if DesRatiopr 1 "Pass" "Fail"  Checkpr "Pass"Combined Tension and Shear (Cl. D.8)DesRation max DesRatioat DesRatiobt DesRatioctp DesRatiocts  0.552 DesRatiov max DesRatioav DesRatiovb DesRatiopr  0.363Checktv "Pass" DesRatiov 0.2 DesRation 1if"Pass" DesRation 0.2 DesRatiov 1if"Pass" DesRatiov DesRation 1.2if"Fail" otherwiseDesRatiotvDesRation DesRatiov1.2 0.76Checktv "Pass"

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0400168/manifest

Comment

Related Items