PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA 
STAFF BRIEFING 
Item No.        7a 
Date of Meeting     April 3, 2012 

DATE:    March 26, 2012 
TO:     Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:    Eric Hanson, Manager, Seaport Planning 
Mark C. Griffin, Director, Real Estate Development 
SUBJECT:  Terminal 91 Strategic Planning Briefing 

SYNOPSIS: 
In 2010, staff began preparing a "Development Options Study" to guide investment in
and development of Terminal 91. Staff's work focused on the following objectives: 
Accommodate expansion of "core mission" customers at the site. 
Define the area available for new industrial and commercial tenants that are
permissible under the site's existing industrial zoning. 
Ensure any new development is as financially self-sustaining as possible. 
In August 2011, staff briefed the Commission on four conceptual development options
and the key findings from the planning work. This follow-up briefing summarizes staff's
recommendations for Terminal 91 now that this strategic planning process has concluded. 
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.  Seaport Operations. Terminal 91 is a multi -use industrial facility that supports
robust maritime industrial uses that generate significant economic benefits for the
region.
Recommendation: Pursue feasibility of expanding the existing maritime industrial
base and re-evaluate cruise parking efficiencies.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
March 26, 2012 
Page 2 of 5 
Action Steps: 
(i)     Evaluate the optimal requirements for a new warehouse that supports fishing
industry needs  and generates positive return on investment.  Perform a
detailed feasibility analysis to determine whether an acceptable business
model can be achieved without utilization of the tax levy.  Should the
feasibility study show a positive return, Seaport will come back to
Commission with an appropriate project request.
Strong demand for more warehouse space is regularly expressed by existing
tenants and potential new tenants. Sizeable warehousing space at Terminal 91
has been 100% occupied since 2008. New requests for warehouse space have
been frequent, but there is no existing capacity to meet these requests. The
lack of warehouse space at Terminal 91 has contributed to the loss of one
fishing vessel  customer  whose owner's  decided to homeport  the vessel 
elsewhere. Fishermen's Terminal and the Marine Industrial Center also have
had no unoccupied storage space for many years. Warehouse space in the
entire Ballard area is scarce while demand appears strong.   If feasible,
accommodating the immediate need for more warehousing promotes the
Century Agenda goal of "Doubling the economic value of our fishing
industry." 

(i)     Re-evaluate cruise parking in general. Perform detailed analysis to determine
the optimal use of land currently devoted to cruise parking and to enhance
efficiencies of current parking operations. 
The existing surface parking lot consumes about 10.5 upland acres and its
distant location from the cruise terminal adds operational expense. The Port
must provide adequate area for cruise parking per our lease agreement with
the cruise terminal operator and agreement with cruise lines. Parking garage
feasibility work will likely require a few years as trends in cruise parking
volumes are highly germane to the business case analysis. In addition, it is
exceptionally difficult to forecast uses, and revenues associated with a new
garage and new leasing strategies would have to be explored to enhance a
garage's financial feasibility. The study of an alternative site location option
to build a parking garage directly adjacent to the Smith Cove Cruise Terminal
will be included in this work. Creation of a parking garage could free up at
least eight acres of additional land that could then be used to attract more
industries to the site and could potentially simplify parking operations
depending on its location within the terminal. There also may be future
business strategies unrelated to an on-site parking garage that could be
pursued to meet parking needs associated with cruise terminal operations.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
March 26, 2012 
Page 3 of 5 

2.  New Industrial Development on the Uplands. Major new capital investments by
the Port in utilities and roadways in the uplands area are not financially feasible
currently.
Recommendation: Preserve flexibility but pursue resources and methods that will
improve the feasibility of new development while maintaining the existing revenue
base.
Action Steps:
(i)     Advance discussions with the City of Seattle about ways to enhance the
feasibility of new industrial development.
Consider participation in the Pioneer Industrial Development Pilot Project
program sponsored by the City. This program seeks to offer regulatory and
policy flexibility and financial support for up to ten demonstration projects.
The City expects to issue a call for proposals in spring 2012.
(ii)    Continue short-term storage uses on the uplands acreage.   Continuing this
type of use of open areas requires minimal investment and generates revenue.
(iii)    Perform maintenance and repair as needed to support the continued short-term
storage uses.
Over the long term, maintenance and repair needs are expected to increase for
paving, water lines, electrical systems, and stormwater management. Thi s
strategy proposes to maintain infrastructure to meet existing uses rather than
pursuing significant new capital investment in utilities and roads needed to
attract additional development.
(iv)   Explore developer interest in the northern portion of the site through a request
for qualifications / proposal process.
Approximately 22 acres of uplands acreage is suitable for attracting new
industrial development without conflicting with any existing operations (see
Attachment 1). This approach would test the r eal estate development
community's interest in ground leasing this area as iswithout any significant 
Port investmentto determine if third-party developers can feasibly construct
the infrastructure needed to support new industrial development.  This
approach conserves Port capital dollars. If viable, a number of issues would
have to be addressed including northern ingress and egress to the terminal.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
March 26, 2012 
Page 4 of 5 
(v)    If the third-party developer approach is not viable, staff may consider
marketing the uplands area for longer-term (i.e. 5+ years) storage uses. This
approach, however, may compromise future flexibility. 

3.  West Yard Parcel  King County Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO). King
County intends to locate a new CSO facility on the 5.8-acre West Yard parcel which
is currently utilized to provide public shoreline access and open yard storage to an
existing fishing industry tenant.  The facility will include a 1.8 million-gallon
underground tank, an above-ground operations building and other ancillaryfeatures. 
The CSO facility substantially limits any future development capacity of the parcel.
Recommendation: Sell the West Yard parcel in its entirety to King County rather
than accepting a permanent easement for the CSO facility.
Action Steps:
(i)     Cooperate in a voluntary acquisition of the West Yard parcel in lieu of
condemnation by King County.
(ii)    Brief and obtain Commission authorization to sell the site once an offer from
the County has been received and negotiated. 

4.  Long-Term Vision. Attachment 2 displays a long term vision concept for Terminal
91 that maximizes the site's potential to support existing industry and promote more
industrial growth for the region.  This vision requires  resolving the financial
feasibility of upgrading utilities and roadways, building a parking garage and
replacing the aged timber dock structures at berth 6/8. From a financial perspective
that focuses strictly on positive returns, these projects, if built solely by the Port, are
likely unfeasible. Justification for these pr ojects will need to include associated
benefits to the region's economic vitality and the Port's job creation mission.
Recommendation:  Continue to identify collaborative and creative means to
overcome the financial challenges with various public and private entity
stakeholders.
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BRIEFING: 
Attachment 1: Area available for other industrial uses 
Attachment 2: Long term vision demonstrating maximum development potential 
Attachment 3: Existing conditions aerial photo 
Attachment 4: PowerPoint Presentation

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
March 26, 2012 
Page 5 of 5 

PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS: 
August 2, 2011 -  Terminal 91 Strategic Planning Briefing presented to
Commission. 
July 13, 2010 - the Commission authorized execution of consultant agreements
and service directives to accomplish work proposed for the T-91 planning project
and to develop a Real Estate strategy to improve, maintain and update Port
facilities to meet new market demands at T-91. 
April 13, 2010  Strategic Planning for Future Development of T-91 Briefing
presented to Commission.