8b. Memo - CRCF Camera Improvements Construction Authorization

COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          8b 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting       June 22, 2021 
DATE:     June 11, 2021 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Dawn Hunter, Director, Aviation Commercial Management 
Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management 
SUBJECT:  Consolidated Rental Car Facility Camera Replacement (CIP # C800975) Construction 
Amount of this request:               $1,511,000 
Total estimated project cost:          $2,231,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to proceed with construction of the
Consolidated Rental Car Facility Camera Replacement project using existing job order contracts 
at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport for an amount not-to-exceed $1,511,000 of a total
estimated project cost of $2,231,000. (CIP # C800975) 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
This project provides security enhancements to the Consolidated Rental Car Facility (CRCF) 
Camera Replacement project at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA) in response to the
2018 security assessment of the facility. The CRCF video camera system installed with the original
building construction is now obsolete and has reached the end of its useful life. This system is
necessary to continue to meet the security and RCF lease agreement requirements. Under the
terms of the lease agreements with the rental car companies, replacement of the camera system
is solely a Port responsibility. 
This project will utilize existing Job Order Contracts to complete construction. During project
definition  the  project  budget  required  an  increase  to  cover  additional  infrastructure
modifications necessary to mitigate network shortfalls not identified when the initial budget was
established. 
JUSTIFICATION 
The CRCF is chronically subject to theft attempts on rental cars, with a noticeable increase since
2017. The older cameras offered poor resolution, whereas the new cameras' higher resolution
will provide useful information for security purposes. 

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8b__                               Page 2 of 4 
Meeting Date: June 22, 2021 
The security camera project is part of a larger effort by the Port and tenants at the CRCF to
counter vehicle theft activity. This project will replace existing and add new cameras to cover
additional areas within the facility. All replacement and new cameras are of the latest technology
and include new mounts with related cabling and communications equipment. 
Diversity in Contracting 
This project will utilize a Job Order Contract (JOC) to construct this project's scope of work. The
overall JOC contract has a 16% Women and Minority Business Enterprise (WMBE) commitment 
goal. Each work order within the JOC strives to achieve this stated WMBE commitment. 
DETAILS 
Scope of Work 
This project will replace existing cameras within the common areas and add additional cameras
in areas currently having minimal or no coverage. Updated computer network equipment will be
installed in the building communication rooms which will include upgraded cable from these
rooms to the cameras. 
These technological improvements will provide higher resolution images of the common areas 
of the facility. Consistent with Port policies, these cameras will not include any biometric
screening capabilities. 
Schedule 
Activity 
Construction start                                2021 Quarter 3 
In-use date                                       2022 Quarter 4 
Cost Breakdown                                     This Request           Total Project 
Design                                                          $0               $720,000 
Construction                                            $1,511,000             $1,511,000 
Total                                                        $1,511,000              $2,231,000 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Do not proceed with construction; cancel project and expense design costs 
Cost Implications: Expense Design Costs $500,000 
Pros: 
(1)   Lowest cost option 
Cons: 
(1)   Does not address coverage gap identified within the CRCF 
(2)   Would not improve the security coverage concerns of the facility. 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8b__                               Page 3 of 4 
Meeting Date: June 22, 2021 
(3)   Does not meet the terms of the lease. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Replace the existing cameras and add additional cameras as designed to provide
more complete facility coverage. 
Cost Implications: $2,231,000 
Pros: 
(1)   Corrects the problem of poor image quality from existing cameras 
(2)   Complies with the CRCF lease terms, which require the Port to undertake these
repairs/replacements 
(3)   Expands the existing camera system, upgrades the image capturing potential, responds
to the security assessment and operation needs by reducing coverage gaps within the
CRCF 
Cons: 
(1)   Costs more than Alternative 1 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary                      Capital                  Total 
COST ESTIMATE 
Original estimate                                         $1,180,000              $1,180,000 
Previous changes  net                                  $1,074,000              $1,074,000 
Revised estimate                                        $2,254,000              $2,254,000 
Art (1% Transfer to Art CIP)                                 ($23,000)                ($23,000) 
Revised Total                                            $2,231,000              $2,231,000 
AUTHORIZATION 
Previous authorizations                                    $720,000                $720,000 
Current request for authorization                        $1,511,000              $1,511,000 
Total authorizations, including this request               $2,231,000              $2,231,000 
Remaining amount to be authorized                           $0                    $0 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
This project (CIP C800975) was included in the 2021-2025 capital budget and plan of finance with
an estimated cost of $2,254,000. There was a cost increase for scope expansion for additional
infrastructure modifications necessary to mitigate network shortfalls not identified when the
initial budget was established. Due to the 2019 Art Fund policy change, 1% of the project cost,
$23,000, will be transferred pending this request. The funding source will be Customer Facility
Charges (CFCs). 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8b__                               Page 4 of 4 
Meeting Date: June 22, 2021 

Financial Analysis and Summary 
Project cost for analysis                         $2,231,000 
Business Unit (BU)                             Rental Car Facility 
Effect on business performance (NOI after     NOI after depreciation will decrease 
depreciation) 
IRR/NPV (if relevant)                           N/A 
CPE Impact                                  N/A 
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership) 
Aviation Maintenance would incur costs associated with the replacement of cameras as they fail.
During design, the project team looked holistically to balance upfront costs with ongoing
maintenance  costs to arrive at the best overall financial decision for the Port. Aviation
Maintenance involvement during design has resulted in a more innovative camera choice,
resulting in reduced total number cameras required to be installed. 
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND 
None 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)   Presentation slides 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
December 10, 2019  The Commission authorized design and a project budget increase. 








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

Limitations of Translatable Documents

PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.