COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          8g 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting      March 22, 2022 

DATE:     February 2, 2022 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Melinda Miller, Director of Real Estate Asset Management, 
Susie Archuleta, Senior Real Estate Manager, 
Rod Jackson, Capital Project Manager 
SUBJECT:  WTCW Roof Replacement (CIP #C801104) 
Amount of this request:               $1,915,000 
Total estimated project cost:          $2,215,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to advertise, award and execute a
major public works contract and fund the construction phase of the WTCW Roof Replacement
Project in the amount of $1,915,000. This request would increase the total project authorization
to-date to $2,215,000 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The World Trade Center West (WTCW) Building was built in 1998 and is 24 years old. Its existing
17,000sf ballasted gravel roof is original to the structure and is nearing the end of its service life.
This project will extend the service life of existing WTCW roofing system via repair, overlay and 
replacement,  based  on  recommendations  contained  in  a third-party  assessment  study
completed on January 9, 2019. Due to funding priorities over the past few years, this roof project
was deferred but is now ready to move forward due to its critical need. The proposed project is
intended to provide reuse of existing ballasted roofing, membrane, and insulation. The project
includes installing additional insulation including another 80-mil membrane overlay while adding
11,000sf Green Roof Technology to the building's roof top. This will provide an energy efficient
and sustainable replacement roof and will have a design service life of 30+ years.
The project is currently in the final design/construction documentation phase, with design
documents at the 100% stage of completion. 


Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                   Page 2 of 6 
Meeting Date: March 22, 2022 
JUSTIFICATION 
This project is an asset stewardship and revenue preservation project which would repair and
replace this essential roof infrastructure. The project team has explored design alternatives to
minimize impacts on the environment and has selected durable materials to maximize the service
life of the system including adding a sustainable Green Roof Technology.
The project supports the Port's Central Agency Goal 3, Responsibly Invest in the Economic
Growth of the Region and all its Communities; Goal 4, Be the greenest and most energy-efficient
port in North America; and Goal 6, Be a Highly Effective Public Agency. 
Diversity in Contracting 
Diversity in Contracting has evaluated the planned construction activities and established a 5% 
WMBE aspirational goal. 
DETAILS 
The WTCW building is a commercial office building constructed in 1998. In addition to traditional
office space, it includes a ground floor caf that is popular with the neighboring Marriott guests,
and the World Trade Center Seattle club on the fourth floor, which provides conferencing and
restaurant services to its members.   The Port  manages the WTCW's ongoing property
maintenance  and revenues. This  management  includes  identifying the need for capital
improvements to the building structure, which includes the roof. 
The roof is original to the WTCW building and is now 24 years old and at the end of its useful life.
With the recommendation of its third-party consultant, the Port has determined that roof
replacement is necessary to maintain the integrity of the building envelope.  The scope of the
proposed roof replacement is an overlay installation and not a full roof replacement. An overlay
requires fewer labor hours than a new roof, so labor costs are considerably less.  The existing
ballast, membrane, and insulation will be reused to save on material disposal costs.  Adding
additional insulation per code and overlaying with an additional 80mil membrane will increase
the life of the roofing system to 30+ additional years. 
This project is Tier 2 under the Sustainable Evaluation Framework. Third-party certification is not
being pursued due to the project's limited scope (roof replacement), but green design options
were considered. Sustainability goals include energy efficiency, environmental health,
sustainable asset management, material reuse, financial sustainability, and tenant impacts. Solar
opportunities were explored but eliminated from scope due to weight (structural load), building
positioning, and potential glare hazards. 
Application of Green Roof Technology is the recommended alternative since it provides multiple
environmental benefits at a moderate cost increase. Upgrading the design to include a Green
Roof provides an innovation example and an opportunity for the Port to pilot a new technology
and achieve significant environmental benefits in a location where none were previously. This

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                   Page 3 of 6 
Meeting Date: March 22, 2022 
alternative reduces heat island effect, sequesters carbon, retains stormwater, reduces runoff
temperature, creates additional pollinator habitat, and provides additional rooftop insulation
and interest to those neighbors with a site line to the roof. In the upgraded design, roughly 65%
of the existing ballasted roof is converted into a Green Roof. A Green Roof can extend the life of
the roofing system by eliminating ultraviolet sun rays from deteriorating the roof membrane. 
When a regular maintenance routine is followed, the useful life of a Green Roof can reach 50
years compared to the 25-year life of a ballasted roof. 
The Green Roof is comprised of trays of sedum that are connected to form landscape beds. The 
beds will include an irrigation system to support these plants during the dry months of summer. 
Preliminary calculations show that the structural load of the existing ballasted roof is comparable
to that of the sedum beds, so that no structural modifications to the roof will be needed to
accommodate the Green Roof.
The total project cost of the recommended alternative is estimated to be $2,215,000 which is
$826K more than the least expensive option, Alternative 2 estimated to be $1,389,000. Despite
its' higher cost, Staff recommends Alternative 3 because it enables the Port to achieve the 
broadest range of goals relative to the other alternatives. Funding for this project was included
in the 2022 capital budget plan of finance. 
Scope of Work 
The scope of work for the WTCW Roof Replacement project includes. 
(1)   Reuse of existing gravel ballast to eliminate waste. 
(2)   Installing a new 80-mil membrane reusing exiting ballast for an energy efficient roofing
system that includes additional insulation and a Green Roof technology. 
(3)   Use environmentally sustainable components and methods as appropriate, 
such as: waste minimization, selection of materials with limited toxicity and greenhouse
gas emissions, and utilization of construction best management practices (i.e. reduced
idling). 
Schedule 
Activity 
Commission Construction Funding authorization        March 2022 
Construction Advertisement                           April/May 2022 
Construction Start                                        Q2 2022 
In-use date                                               Q4 2022 
Cost Breakdown                                     This Request           Total Project 
Design                                                           $0               $300,000 
Construction                                             $1,915,000             $1,915,000 
Total                                                         $2,215,000             $2,215,000 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                   Page 4 of 6 
Meeting Date: March 22, 2022 

ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1    Do nothing, maintain  the current roof  and delay upgrades to the roof.
Maintenance costs of $5K annually (averaged over 12 months) will continue. 
Cost Implications: $5K 
Pros: 
(1)   Defers Port funding. 
(2)   Allows the Port to reallocate capital investment dollars. 
Cons: 
(1)    Does not advance efforts to achieve Century Agenda goals. 
(2)    Increases the chances that water infiltration will disrupt tenant activities and damage
the interior of the facility causing expensive repairs. 
(3)    Safety of the tenant could be compromised due to the slip hazard to tenant and
employees. 
(4)   Increase of future construction costs is likely and the risk of emergency repair costs will
continue to increase. 
(5)    The cost of a future roofing project and additional repairs in the event of roof failure
would be the full cost of replacement ($2.21 million) plus escalation and the cumulative
ongoing expense costs. Risk of the cost of lost tenant space due to emergency repairs
is unknown but likely would be high. 
(6)    Maintenance costs will continue. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Replacement in-kind.  Install a new 80-mil membrane roof and additional
insulation while reusing existing gravel ballast to provide a 30-year service life. 
Cost Implications: Minimum of $1.38M 
Pros: 
(1)    Advances Century Agenda goals. 
(2)    Replaces project elements on the existing roofing system with various roof elements 
that have a 25-year life. 
(3)    The  cost  of  Alternative  2  is  approximately  $826K  less  than  the  recommended
Alternative 3. 
(4)    Repairing and replacing various roof elements will provide the lowest total cost of
ownership. 
(5)    Helps to assure a stronger positive tenant experience and avoids potential safety
hazards. 
(6)    Proactive maintenance provides protection of Port assets. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                   Page 5 of 6 
Meeting Date: March 22, 2022 
(7)    Provide for a warranted roof that will minimize the cost of repairs going forward for the
foreseeable life of the roof. 
Cons: 
(1)    This alternative uses $1.38M of capital funds that might otherwise be made available
for other uses on other projects. 
(2)    Additional ballast may be required once the re-used ballast is in place over the new
membrane.
(3)    Achieves no environmental goals. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3  Upgrade and install a new 80-mil membrane overlay and additional insulation
while reusing existing gravel ballast including the installation of 11,000sf Green Roof Technology
that will have a 30+ year life. 
Cost Implications: $2,215,000 
Pros: 
(1)    Advances Century Agenda goals. 
(2)    Upgrades and replaces project elements on the existing roofing system with various
roof applications that have a 30+ year life. 
(3)    The 30+ year life span of this roof system will protect this Port asset, serving the Port
and the tenants well. 
(4)    Helps to assure a stronger positive tenant experience and therefore preserves this
building's revenue generation. 
(5)    This project would provide for a warranted roof that will minimize the cost of repairs
going forward for the foreseeable life of the roof. 
(6)    Upgrading to Green Roof Technology conceals the roof from harmful ultraviolet light
and sun rays, extending the life of the roof. 
(7)    The live areas of the Green Roof will produce oxygen, provide stormwater retention,
and also create habitat and a stopping point for pollinators. 
(8)    Substituting areas of ballast with a Green Roof reduces the heat load to the building
and therefore reduces reliance on the HVAC system for cooling. 
Cons: 
(1)    This alternative uses $2.21M of capital funds that might otherwise be made available
for other uses on other projects.
(2)    The cost of Alternative 3 is approximately $826K more than Alternative 2. 
(3)    Minor weed removal may be needed twice per year at a cost of $1.5K per year. 
(4)   Since this is a new technology, there is some unknowns associated with performance
and tenant maintenance. 
This is the recommended alternative. 


Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                   Page 6 of 6 
Meeting Date: March 22, 2022 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary                   Total 
COST ESTIMATE 
Current estimate                                   $2,215,000 
AUTHORIZATION                                    0 
Previous authorizations                               $300,000 
Current request for authorizations                   $1,915,000 
Total authorizations, including this request           $2,215,000 
Remaining amount to be authorized                       $0 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
This project has been included in the 2022 Plan of Finance under C801104 P66 World Trade
Center West Roof Replacement at an estimated total project cost of $1,676,000. The additional
estimated cost of $539,000 will be funded by C800216 EDD Reserve. 
This project will be funded by the Tax Levy. 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
Project cost for analysis              $2,215,000 
Business Unit (BU)                  Portfolio Management 
Effect on business performance    The project will maintain annual gross revenue of $1.4
(NOI after depreciation)             million from WTCW. Depreciation will increase by $148K 
per year, thereby reducing the NOI by the same amount. 
IRR/NPV (if relevant)                No incremental revenue. The NPV is the present value of
the project cost. 
CPE Impact                       N/A 
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership) 
This upgrade will provide protection of Port assets and extend their useful life of the roof system
to achieve longevity and environmental goals. Maintaining existing assets and enhancing their
environmental performance will preserve the economic vitality of our operations and serve the
Port, tenants, and their customers well. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)   Sustainable Design Approach (SDA)/ Sustainable Design Strategy (SDS) Memo 
(2)   Presentation 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
December 14, 2021  The Commission authorized Design funding authorization. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).