Template revised January 10, 2019.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
6k
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
November 19, 2019
DATE: November 7, 2019
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Jim Rosmond, Manager, PCS Construction, Port Construction Services
Dwight Rives, Director, PCS, Port Construction Services
Tina Soike, Chief Engineering Director, Engineering Services
SUBJECT: Card Reader Installations at Remote Engineering Offices
Amount of this request:
$350,000
Total estimated project cost:
$350,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to: (1) approve funding for design,
construction, and permitting of card (badge) readers at the exterior doors of three large modular
buildings staffed by personnel managing capital construction projects at the airport and (2) use
port crews and small works contracts for installation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The modular buildings considered for this work are located at three remote sites on the periphery
of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. They provide ready and convenient access to
construction sites and contractors during the Port’s capital construction program. Conventional
key systems at the building exterior doors will be replaced with a more secure means to limit
access of these buildings to Port, consultant, and contractor personnel.
Work for this project began as a small project funded at $272,000. Due to the disclosure of bids
for the badge reader installations that were higher than estimated by the Port, Port Construction
Services has increased the project budget to $350,000, which triggers the need for Commission
authorization under the General Delegation of Authority.
JUSTIFICATION
The need for the badge reader systems is occasioned by recent instances of uninvited persons
entering these Port work site buildings that are easily accessible to the public. This will benefit
hundreds of port staff and contracted personnel that work with Port staff in these locations on a
daily and sometimes 24-hour basis. The Westside Field Office location is expected to be
operational for at least 6 years before is it replaced within the westside maintenance campus
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6k Page 2 of 5
Meeting Date: November 19, 2019
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
development. The other two locations do not have defined replacement plans, the expected
building lives are approximately 10 years.
Diversity in Contracting
No minority and women business goals for this project have been established.
DETAILS
See Executive Summary
Scope of Work
The scope of work for this project is for the procurement and installation of badge readers and
associated circuitry, door hardware, and network equipment servicing all exterior doors for three
remote modular buildings. A contractor is to install all electrified equipment and accessories.
Port in-house resources will assist the contractor with carpentry work and activation of the
Access Control System network.
Schedule
• 7/26/2019 Access Controls for Logistics Sites project approved by the Aviation
Managing Director.
• 8/23/2019 Project design completed, ready for permit application and contract bid
preparation.
• 9/06/2019 Aviation Building Department issues Building Permit.
• 10/03/2019 Bids opened for Port of Seattle Contract #SW-0320006. Apparent Low
Bid determined to be Johnson Controls.
• 11/19/2019 Commission approval of $350,000 budget for project.
• 12/03/2019 Notice of Intent to Award contract issued to low bidder.
• 12/17/2019 Contract #SW-0320006 awarded.
• 1/10/2020 Contractor’s Site Safety Plan accepted & Notice to Proceed issued.
• 1/20/2020 On site construction begins (projected).
Cost Breakdown
This Request
Total Project
Design
$25,000
$25,000
Construction
$325,000
$325,000
Total
$350,000
$350,000
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6k Page 3 of 5
Meeting Date: November 19, 2019
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Maintain current level of security of the three remote modular buildings with key
locks at exterior doors.
Cost Implications: Negligible. A modest operating budget is maintained under the status quo for
issuing keys to new personnel for access into the three buildings.
Pros:
(1) Building security is presently maintained with locked doors, requiring personnel to
either access the buildings with keys in their possession or by summoning receptionists
to permit their entry.
(2) Costs are limited to the issuance of keys to new personnel authorized entry, or to that
of re-keying doors if required.
(3) No design is required.
Cons:
(1) During normal working hours, buildings are accessible to uninvited visitors if doors are
left open or ajar.
(2) Receptionist personnel are disrupted frequently to permit entry for authorized visitors
or personnel who do not have keys in their possession.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Evaluate each of the three buildings for their security risk to determine a
hierarchy of needs for installing badge readers. Eliminate installation of the card readers to any
building that is deemed to possess an “acceptable” risk to a security breach(es).
Cost Implications: This option could reduce the budget to the Small Jobs Capital level if one or
more of the buildings were eliminated from consideration and left to remain on keyed access. A
savings of $70,000 to $100,000 (under a $350,000 budget) could be realized by reducing the
number of buildings to two.
Pros:
(1) This alternative would permit the project to proceed as a Small Jobs Capital project and
authorized by the Executive Director under the General Delegation of Authority.
(2) The construction duration (projected to be 2.5 months) would be reduced by roughly 3
weeks.
Cons:
(1) Two of the three buildings are in highly populated areas near the terminal—thus more
susceptible to non-invited intrusions. The westside field office is in a very remote area
and much more susceptible to an intrusion when the building is sparsely occupied. All
three buildings are of equal size, occupancy, and store valuable property and sensitive
documents.
(2) Cost. The installation of three buildings under one project employs an economy of
scale. Should a third building later be considered for card readers, the cost would be
proportionally much higher (at least $150,000 or more).
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6k Page 4 of 5
Meeting Date: November 19, 2019
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Install badge readers on all 14 exterior doors of the three modular buildings,
which will replace the current keyed lock systems. The front doors to each building will have
override buttons at reception stations to permit unbadged guests to enter
Cost Implications: This project will require the full funding of $350,000. The proposed capital
portion is $25,000 for design, $260,000 for contract work, $30,000 for in-house construction
support, and $35,000 for project management costs.
Pros:
(1) This alternative provides intended protection of the buildings from direct entry by
uninvited personnel.
(2) This alternative will obviate the need for frequent summoning of receptionist to permit
bypass entries to authorized personnel who don’t have keys. Similarly, issuance of keys
to new personnel and recall of them from departing personnel will not be required.
Positive control of who is authorized to enter these buildings will be maintained.
(3) This alternative will enable immediate award of contract to a standing bid, eliminating
period of up to 60 days for bid package preparation, advertising, bidding, and award.
Cons:
(1) This is the most costly of the three alternatives.
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary
Capital
Expense
Total
COST ESTIMATE
Original estimate
$0
$272,000
$272,000
Cost increase
$350,000
($272,000)
$78,000
Revised cost estimate
$350,000
$0
$350,000
AUTHORIZATION
Previous authorizations
$0
$272,000
$272,000
Current request for authorization
$350,000
$0
$350,000
Total authorizations, including this request
$350,000
$0
$350,000
Remaining amount to be authorized
$0
$0
$0
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
This project was originally included in the expense budget. It was approved on July 26, 2019 and
activated as a project August 6, 2019. Roughly $25,000 has been expensed or earmarked to date
for design and planning efforts. The project is now included under CIP # C800751. The funding
source is the Airport Development Fund. The impact on airline cost per enplaned passenger (CPE)
is less than $.01.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6k Page 5 of 5
Meeting Date: November 19, 2019
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
None
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
None
