PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA               Item No.      6b 
ACTION ITEM 
Date of Meeting     January 14, 2014 
DATE:    January 7, 2014 
TO:      Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:   Michael Burke, Director, Seaport Leasing and Asset Management 
Curtis Stahlecker, Project Manager, Seaport Project Management 
SUBJECT:  Terminal 91, C-175 Building Roof Replacement (CIP #C800430) 
Amount of This Request:        $2,210,000   Source of Funds:  General Fund 
Est. Total Project Cost:          $2,450,000 
Est. State and Local Taxes:        $167,000   Est. Jobs Created:          19 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to advertise for construction
bids, execute construction contracts, and fund the construction phase of the Terminal 91, C175
Building Roof Replacement Project in an amount not to exceed $2,210,000 for a total estimated
project cost of $2,450,000. 
SYNOPSIS 
The roofing system on the C-175 building at Terminal 91 is approximately 20 years old and has
performed well. However, some portions of the roof are beyond their service life and show signs
of aging and deterioration.  Under the lease agreement, maintenance of the roof is the
responsibility of the Port. The design is complete and the project is ready to advance into the
construction phase. This phase will include advertising for construction bids, execution of a
major construction contract, and all other work necessary to complete the project, which was 
included within the 2014 budget and plan of finance. 
BACKGROUND 
The C-175 building is leased to CityIce Cold Storage, LLC, which operates a cold storage
operation in the facility. The building, built in the early 1990s, is in good condition.  Roof
inspections were performed in November 2009, February 2010, and December 2012. The first
of these was sponsored by the tenant; the others by the Port. All of the inspections indicate the
roof is showing signs of deterioration with membrane shrinkage, tenting, and uplift during strong
winds.  The 2009 and 2010 inspections recommended replacement by 2013 and 2014
respectively.  The 2012 report identified areas of ice buildup within the roofing insulation
system. The preliminary design identified that approximately one quarter of the roof is at the

Template revised May 30, 2013.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
January 7, 2014 
Page 2 of 5 
end of its useful life and the remainder is in fair shape having a potential remaining useful life of
two to five years, (2015 to 2018 respectively). Regardless of the remaining useful life, the entire
roof would require replacement at one time. The design is complete and the project is ready to
move into the construction phase. 
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND DETAILS 
As the roof membrane is near the end of its service life, replacing the roofing system now will
avoid costs for future repairs and potential water damage to the building insulation, structural
elements and tenant operations. The lease agreement between the Port and CityIce has the
maintenance and repair of the roof as an obligation of the Port.
Project Objectives 
Install a new roofing system on a Port-owned asset. 
Minimize disruption to the tenant and tenant operations. 
Incorporate environmentally sustainable practices into the project where practical. 
Complete project on time and within budget. 
Scope of Work 
The project consists of the following components: 
Remove and replace the 90,000 square foot roof membrane and associated roof
appurtenances. 
Install the new roof system. 
Include environmentally sustainable components and construction methods as appropriate. 
Schedule 
Start         Finish 
Commission Authorization for Construction        January 2014     January 2014 
Advertise and Award                     February 2014      April 2014 
Construction                              May 2014     October 2014 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Budget/Authorization Summary              Capital     Expense   Total Project 
Original Budget                            $0          $0          $0 
Previous Authorizations                  $240,000          $0     $240,000 
Current request for authorization            $2,210,000          $0    $2,210,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request     $2,450,000          $0    $2,450,000 
Remaining budget to be authorized               $0          $0          $0 
Total Estimated Project Cost              $2,450,000          $0    $2,450,000

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
January 7, 2014 
Page 3 of 5 
Project Cost Breakdown                     This Request       Total Project 
Construction                               $1,751,000         $1,751,000 
Construction Management                     $237,000         $237,000 
Design                                       $ 0          $168,000 
Project Management                          $49,000         $107,000
Permitting                                    $6,000           $20,000 
State & Local Taxes (estimated)                   $167,000          $167,000 
Total                                      $2,210,000         $2,450,000 
Budget Status and Source of Funds 
This project was included in the 2014 plan of finance under Committed-Authorized CIP 
#C800430  P90 C175 Roof Replacement  for a total cost of $2,450,000 (including actual
spending in 2011 and 2012 and forecasted spending in 2013). 
This project will be funded from the General Fund. 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
CIP Category             Renewal/Enhancement 
Project Type              Renewal & Replacement 
Risk adjusted discount rate     N/A 
Key risk factors              Construction costs may increase due to market trends
or unforeseen damage to the remaining roofing system
below the roof membrane. 
Material costs, such as petroleum based roofing
membrane are subject to price fluctuations. 
Project schedule could be delayed due to project
complexity, weather, or the need to minimize tenant
disruptions. 
Project cost for analysis        $2,450,000 
Business Unit (BU)          Seaport Industrial Properties 
Effect on business performance   Preserves T91 Building C175 revenue of
approximately $458,000 per year. 
Depreciation expense will increase approximately
$122,500 per year based on a 20-year useful life. 
IRR/NPV             The NPV is the present value of the project cost. 
Lifecycle Cost and Savings 
A lifecycle cost analysis was performed using three types of roofing materials in three distinct
design configurations  with  design life ranging between 20 and 30 years.  The  analysisrecommended
roofing system with the best return on investment is a roof with a 20-year design

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
January 7, 2014 
Page 4 of 5 
life. This design includes the removal of the existing membrane and installation of a new fully
adhered white membrane. With proper maintenance , this system should provide a service life of
25 to 30 years. 
STRATEGIES AND OBJECTIVES 
The project is consistent with Century Agenda objectives to optimize infrastructure investment
and financial stewardship by preserving the life of a Port asset; supports economic growth and
vitality by preserving existing jobs and commerce; and advances the objective of becoming the
greenest and most energy efficient North American port by reducing pollutants and increasing
energy efficiency. 
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE 
Economic Development 
Replacing the roof complies with a lease obligation, protects the asset and maintains the
expected service life of the building with minimal to no disruption to tenant operations.  The
project allows tenant operations to function relatively uninterrupted thereby maintaining jobs,
commerce, and revenues. 
Environmental Responsibility 
The following environmentally sustainable components and activities investigated during the
design phase will be incorporated into the new roof system. 
The roof membrane will have a solar reflective index (SRI) that meets or exceeds 80,
which will reduce the thermal gain the building experiences requiring less energy to
maintain the subzero temperatures in the freezer units that comprise roughly 80 percent
of the building. The use of a roof with a high SRI may allow the Port of Seattle to
receive an energy rebate from Seattle City Light. Staff is currently working on the
application. 
The new roofing system will replace the existing metal flashing and gutter systems with
zinc-free materials thereby eliminating the zinc contributions from the roofing systems
that currently enter the waters of Puget Sound. 
Recycling of the existing roofing membrane is required, saving both the landfill space
and allowing the roof components to be re-used elsewhere. 
An audio bird deterrent system will be tested on an area of the roof to deter geese. If
effective, the system will be deployed on the entire roof, which will remove bird fecal
material from being discharged from the roof drains into the Sound. 
Other environmentally sustainable components investigated but not incorporated into the project
were: 
Generating energy through solar panels or wind turbines, not economically viable due to 
infrastructure costs, limited solar gain and available wind. 
Reuse of rainwater within the building is not viable due to infrastructure cost and low
water usage.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
January 7, 2014 
Page 5 of 5 
Storm water bio-filtration not advanced due to limited available space on the terminal and
limited effectiveness. 
Community Benefits 
The Office of Social Responsibility will coordinate with the project manager and the
procurement departments to determine opportunities for small business participation in support
of Resolution No. 3618. 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1)  Do nothing/replace the roof after it leaks or fails. The roof is currently
functioning. The risk of waiting until the roof leaks or fails is that emergency repairs would need
to be performed during the period when the new roofing system is being designed and bid,
potentially increasing the costs. Damage to the insulation and roof support structure could also
occur, increasing the replacement cost as well as having the potential of disrupting tenant
operations. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2)  Delay the replacement for one to two years, 2015 to 2018, respectively, to 
extend the existing service. During this time, additional monitoring and spot repairs would be
performed as needed, paying particular attention to the section of the roof that is at the end of the
service life. The risk of selecting this alternative is twofold. The first is the combination of
increased costs for inspection and maintenance and unknown escalation costs of construction that
may exceed the savings gained by the extended service live of the existing roof. The second risk
is design may no longer be valid and would need to be redone in part to address any potential
changes in the building code or materials. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3)  Total lifecycle costs were analyzed for roof systems having a design life of 20
years and 30 years, respectively. The roof system with a 20 -year design life has the lowest total
cost of ownership and is the recommended replacement roof system. Replacement of the roof
now will reduce future risks of a major roofing system failure, restore the energy efficiency of
the roof, and reduce the risk of emergency repair costs. This is the recommended alternative 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
PowerPoint presentation. 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
July 26, 2011  the Port Commission approved $190,000 for the design and permitting
phase of the Terminal 91, C-175 Building Roof Replacement project (CIP #C800430) 
for a total authorization of $240,000.