COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
8b
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
March 28, 2023
DATE : March 10, 2023
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Joanna Hingle, Assistant Director of Engineering - Design
Laura Wolfe, Senior Environmental Program Manager
SUBJECT:
Contract to Develop Waterfront Design and Environmental Standards
Amount of this request:
$500,000
Total estimated project cost:
$500,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute a consultant service
agreement for an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide services for the development of
Waterfront Design and Environmental Standards.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This request establishes a new Waterfront Development service agreement for a consultant to
assist the Port in development of a system for the creation, implementation, and management
of waterfront design and environmental standards, as well as an initial set of standard documents
for waterfront projects. The design standards will then be managed by Port staff and will facilitate
the revision or creation of future design standards by the Port or others as needed to respond to
industry developments.
Currently, there are no published design standards for the Port’s waterfront projects, which
results in each project team determining what the criteria should be on a project-by-project basis.
The proposed work under this service agreement represents an important process improvement
and contributes to the Port’s goal of being a highly effective public agency. Goals for the
development of the standards include increasing consistency, increasing quality, and providing
greater certainty for cost estimating across projects. Further, the standards will help manage the
Port’s limited resources by providing key project criteria up front rather than spending
duplicative staff and design consultant time developing criteria for similar project types. Finally,
under this service agreement, development of design standards will focus on equity and
sustainability and ensure those principles are foundationally incorporated into all Port waterfront
projects.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b
Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
Page 2 of 7
JUSTIFICATION
Development of Waterfront Design and Environmental standards is intended to serve four
primary goals:
1. Provide increased consistency between projects
a. Standards provide a way to maintain consistency in areas that are important to
the Port, such as sustainability, performance, flexibility in use and maintainability.
Standards are not generally intended to specify manufacturers, models, or other
specifics that would require competition waivers. If this is deemed necessary for
any particular highly-unique item, the competition waiver process would be
coordinated with the Central Procurement Office.
2. Advance Port environmental and equity goals
a. Establish minimum requirements that position Port environmental and equity
goals at the foundation of design criteria and decisions.
b. The Commission Policy Directive on the Sustainable Evaluation Framework
(Resolution 3768) directs action to update and revise construction standards to
reflect advancement in sustainable materials, energy efficiency, and sustainable
design approaches. In this case, that requires the creation of standards where they
do not currently exist.
3. Increase quality and efficiency for individual projects
a. Identify preferred system types, reducing the need for repetitive Port staff design
review input for each project.
b. Streamline project decision-making and result in more efficient maintenance.
4. Provide greater estimating certainty
a. Grow the database of costs for systems commonly used at the Port of Seattle.
b. Reduce change orders due to Port-initiated design revisions.
The current lack of consistent design standards poses consistent challenges for project design
and implementation:
1. High time and cost of project-based decision-making
a. Designers, Project Managers (PMs), project stakeholders, and project sponsors
must consider each design decision on a project-by-project basis, resulting in
duplicative work.
i. Example: Current City of Seattle buildings codes do not specify seismic
design parameters for all port building types, requiring the Port and the
Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections to determine and
negotiate appropriate criteria.
ii. Example: Pier and piling projects— a reoccurring project type—require
engagement from Port environmental staff to confirm chemical ingredient
restrictions on a project-by-project basis that pertain to all in-water
projects. Standards and specifications for projects of this type would
eliminate the need for repeated environmental engagement.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b
Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
Page 3 of 7
2. Inconsistent implementation of environmental sustainability principles across waterfront
projects
a. Without minimum standards, each project team implements independent
systems without environmental performance requirements, resulting in
inconsistent conservation and performance outcomes, or systems that may
deviate from strategic guidance.
i. Example: Project teams often evaluate Heating Ventilation and Cooling
(HVAC) system types, materials, and other common project decisions on a
case-by-case basis. Equipment that has lower up-front costs but is less
efficient and has a shorter life cycle overall is often selected, wasting both
energy and money in long-term costs. Standards would be designed with
environmental and lifecycle cost performance, strategic commitments,
and code compliance or exceedance in mind and minimize the need for
unique project consideration.
3. Inconsistent application of Port initiatives
a. Designers, PMs, and project sponsors may not implement choices that support
broader strategic initiatives.
i. Example: Power monitoring decisions for distribution substations are not
always implemented consistently throughout all branches of a system,
resulting in more manual work to gather full system data.
It is common for large organizations such as the Port of Seattle to have and implement design
standards for infrastructure development. This project will bring the waterfront divisions into
alignment with the Aviation division, which has existing standards and guidelines that streamline
project design and maintenance by providing consistent direction early in the project lifecycle.
Diversity in Contracting
This contract represents an opportunity to meaningfully partner with small businesses and
WMBE firms. We anticipate a goal of at least 20% WMBE utilization, assuming confirmation
from the Diversity in Contracting group.
DETAILS
The project will develop Design and Environmental standards applicable to all Waterfront
development projects to improve facility consistency and maintainability while foundationally
incorporating equity and environmental sustainability into all Port projects. Maritime
Environment and Sustainability, Port Engineering, and Marine Maintenance resources will work
with consultants to complete the project, with the support and input of many other departments.
Total project costs are estimated to be $500,000 over a two-year period. Funding for this project
was included in the 2023-2027 capital budget and plan of finance.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b
Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
Page 4 of 7
Scope of Work
Work will include development of Waterfront Design and Environmental standards. Components
of this work include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Identify
industry
norms,
standards
topic
options,
prioritization
method,
and
implementation strategy
(2) Facilitate internal and external stakeholder meetings to identify recurring topics and
build consensus
(3) Develop a Needs Assessment Report
(4) Develop a Standard section template and recommendations for standards document
management
(5) Facilitate discussions on and make recommendations for authority decisions, variances,
and implementation processes
(6) Develop Priority I Standards
(7) Develop an internal and external facing communication plan to introduce new
standards
(8) Develop Priority II Standards
Schedule
This document and system development work is expected to be completed in phases over two
years, 2023 and 2024.
Activity
Commission authorization
2023 Quarter 1
Procurement complete
2023 Quarter 3
Priority I Standards Complete
2024 Quarter 3
Priority II Standards Complete
2024 Quarter 4
Cost Breakdown
This Request
Total Project
Consultant support, 2023 (year 1)
$200,000
$200,000
Consultant support, 2024 (year 2)
$300,000
$300,000
Total
$500,000
$500,000
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Do not develop Waterfront Design and Environmental standards
Cost Implications: $0
Pros:
(1) Low-cost option
(2) No training required
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b
Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
Page 5 of 7
Cons:
(1) Environmental sustainability and equity are only incorporated on a project-by-project
basis as resources allow
(2) Building equipment, efficiency, and maintainability may be different for each building,
increasing maintenance variability
(3) Port staff will spend significant time evaluating on small, typical projects in addition to
complex opportunities that require unique consideration and design engagement
(4) Certain analyses common to multiple projects (material selection, design criteria, etc.)
will be repeated for each project by Port and/or project consultant staff
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Develop 4 to 8 Waterfront Design and Environmental standards on an expedited
timeline. This would only allow for minimal inter-departmental or external collaboration. The
number of standards developed may be higher or lower depending on the required depth of
content for each selected topic.
Cost Implications: $250,000
Pros:
(1) Moderate-cost option
(2) Faster development timeline (one year)
Cons:
(1) Poor implementation may result from omitting a robust stakeholder engagement and
training process
(2) Without adequate internal and external stakeholder engagement, tradeoffs may not be
fully vetted, and standards may result in unintended consequences
(3) Without adequate cross-departmental collaboration, departments may produce
conflicting standards
(4) If items are missed due to lack of engagement, Port staff will waste time focusing on
small, typical projects instead of complex opportunities
(5) Will require additional work, contracting, to complete the project and fully develop
waterfront design standards and specifications
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Collaborate across departments to form consensus around standards, develop a
communication and roll-out plan, and develop an initial set of 4 to 8 Waterfront Design and
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b
Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
Page 6 of 7
Environmental standards for Waterfront projects. The number of standards developed may be
higher or lower depending on the required depth of content for each selected topic.
Cost Implications: $500,000
Pros:
(1) Robust stakeholder engagement will work through several technical decisions,
providing a clearer and more consistent design basis for projects, thereby saving staff
effort in project development
(2) Environmental sustainability and equity will be incorporated on most projects through
standardization
(3) Robust stakeholder engagement and training process will result in wide-spread,
effective implementation of standards
(4) Creates efficiencies for Port staff by reducing focus on small, typical projects
(5) Robust stakeholder engagement will allow full vetting of tradeoffs, reducing likelihood
of unintended consequences
(6) Building equipment, efficiency, and maintainability will be the same or similar for most
construction, reducing maintenance variability
Cons:
(1) Highest cost option
(2) Slower development timeline (2 years)
(3) Requires challenging engagement and decision-making by the Port for implementation
authority and process development
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The financial impact of this work is most directly linked to the one-time cost of consultant support
in developing the initial Waterfront design and Environmental standards system and content.
The long-term benefit is seen in increasing the quality and maintainability of infrastructure while
decreasing project design phase costs.
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary
Capital
Expense
Total
COST ESTIMATE
Original estimate
$0
$500,000
$500,000
AUTHORIZATION
Previous authorizations
0
0
0
Current request for authorization
0
$500,000
$500,000
Total authorizations, including this request
0
$500,000
$500,000
Remaining amount to be authorized
$0
$0
$0
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b
Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
Page 7 of 7
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
A new 2-year budget request for this work was made and approved in the Maritime Environment
& Sustainability budget. For 2023, the value request was for $151,000. To support the $200,000
expenditure anticipated in 2023, Engineering will be reallocating $49,000 to the effort. The 2024
budgets will include the additional $300,000.
Financial Analysis and Summary
Project cost for analysis
$500,000
Business Unit (BU)
Maritime Environment & Sustainability
Effect on business performance
(NOI after depreciation)
N/A
IRR/NPV (if relevant)
N/A
CPE Impact
N/A
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership)
Funding for this consultant service agreement will be through approved departmental operating
expense. All Port staff support costs required to complete the scope of services will also be
funded through approved operating expense budgets. While maintenance of the standards will
be required to stay current with the industry and the Port’s direction, the staff costs for doing so
are anticipated to be less than the overall cost of more involved decision-making on each project.
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
None
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
None
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
None
