COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6i Page 3 of 5
Meeting Date: October 22, 2019
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Suspend current Small Works contract, demobilize and remobilize contractor
after authorization to extend and fund additional change order work is granted.
Cost Implications: Contract will incur charges for the effort to pull equipment, labor and
materials off the site and then remobilize at a later date. Inefficiencies will also be realized for
possible work during the heating season to provide temporary heat and extended rental costs of
equipment and material cost escalations. Impact estimated to cost approximately $20,000 in
contract costs and additional cost of $10,000 per month for temporary heating measures.
Pros:
(1) Port of Seattle will retain existing contractor for continuity and resumption of contract
work without need for resoliciting a new contract and orienting a new one to take over.
(2) Integrity of normal Port authorization procedures and protection from unauthorized
cost overruns.
Cons:
(1) Work will be pushed into the “heating season” when building occupants will need to
rely on a temporary heating system and probably gaps in heating service during
construction.
(2) Project cost will escalate proportionate to the period of delay in resuming the contract
work.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Terminate the incumbent Small Works contract for convenience and resolicit the
contract as a Major Works Contract project.
Cost Implications: This option will increase costs and delay the start of work well into or after
the heating season. This option will escalate costs for not only a new contract and the
management of it, but also termination costs of the incumbent small work contract. The overall
cost is estimated to be approximately $650,000 ($200,000 in sunken costs of the current contract,
$50,000 for temporary heating measures over the autumn/winter, and $400,000 to follow on
with another contract to complete the work).
Pros:
(1) A repackaged contract may be able to address additional deficiencies by completely
modernizing the current HVAC infrastructure.
(2) The project would follow regulatory procedures for contract solicitation and award.
Cons:
(1) Work to upgrade HVAC system components is nearly 50 percent complete. Termination
would disregard final completion of work which is projected in late October 2019.
(2) Cost. Completion of work on the present course is roughly half of what it will be to
abandon the current contract and transition to another (next year).
(3) This option would terminate the work currently being performed by a DBE contractor.
A rebid of the contract does not assure this opportunity again.